The pilot was to conduct seeding operations on a friend's property. On arrival at the strip, he removed the front right seat from the cabin, leaving only the pilot's seat in the aircraft (the rear passenger seats were not in the aircraft). The pilot then fitted shaped metal sheets to the top and bottom of the baggage door. The door was positioned at the rear of the cabin on the left side of the aircraft. The metal sheets enabled the door to be held open (at an angle of about 17`) during flight, to allow seed to be dispensed through the opening.

The seed mixture was contained in bags, each weighing about 45 kg. Four bags were loaded into the aircraft cabin. One bag was placed adjacent to the baggage door. The person dispensing the seed then sat on the cabin floor leaning against the cabin rear bulkhead. Two further bags were placed on the floor in the area normally occupied by the rear passenger seats and another bag on the floor in the position of the front right seat. About 10 min after the aircraft departed for the seeding area, the property owner became concerned that he had not seen or heard the aircraft and commenced a search. He located the wreckage some 25 min later.

From the evidence available at the site, the aircraft impacted the ground at low speed and with a high rate of descent. Some flap (probably one notch on the selection handle) was selected at impact but whether this was a normal configuration for seeding operations could not be determined. The impact was not survivable, the forces being sufficient to cause the pilot's inboard lap safety belt attachment bracket to fail in overload.

Examination of the seed bags indicated that one bag was probably empty of seed at impact. Nothing to indicate a pre-existing defect in the aircraft controls or engine was found. It appears that the pilot had conducted one seeding run and was conducting a right procedure turn to position for the next run when the accident occurred. It was established that the pilot had received no formal training in low flying or aerial agriculture techniques. The exact sequence of events leading to this accident could not be determined.

At a height of about 350 feet after a normal takeoff, the engine commenced to run roughly. The pilot considered that the problem may have been caused by part of a propeller blade becoming detached. Power was reduced and the pilot commenced to turn back towards the aerodrome. A substantial amount of height was lost during this turn, and the aircraft was seen to make a number of lateral oscillations. It then struck the ground in a tail low, wings level attitude at relatively low forward speed. No pre-impact mechanical defect was found with the engine or propeller. However, initial examination of the wreckage revealed that the fuel selector valve was very close to the "Off" position. Tests conducted on a similar aircraft indicated that with the fuel selector positioned as found, sufficient fuel was available to allow engine operation at low to moderate power settings. It was considered likely that on this occasion the fuel flow required for take-off exceeded the amount available through the selector valve. This in turn led to an excessively lean mixture, and the engine lost power. The aircraft had stalled during the attempted turn back towards the aerodrome, and the pilot had insufficient height in which to effect a recovery.

During a night flight engine failure appeared imminent and pilot elected to land in a clear area near a farmhouse. Weather conditions were reported to be fine with bright moonlight. After circling the area twice at low level the aircraft approached to land with the gear extended and landing lights on. The aircraft subsequently struck the ground in a steep nose down, right wing down attitude. As there was no runway lights installed at the departure aerodrome, the pilot had been anxious to begin the flight before last light. After he had submitted a flight plan he completed a preflight inspection of the aircraft but omitted to accurately determine that the fuel available was sufficient for the flight. Shortly after commencing descent to the destination airport the engine ran roughly and the pilot elected to land on a cleared area adjacent to homestead lights he could see below. The aircraft stalled on late final probably due to the pilot misjudging the landing flare.

The pilot had previously discussed the strip with the station owner but had not ascertained its length. On overflying, the pilot assessed its length as 600 metres, and after checking the P chart he calculated that 500 metres was needed for a landing. The pilot stated that he crossed the threshold at 65-70 knots with full flap selected. Ground marks indicated that the aircraft touched down 195 metres past the threshold. It then bounced twice before overrunning the strip, striking an earth mound and running through a depression. The grass strip was measured as 408 metres long and was slippery from rain which had fallen the previous day.

During the take-off, the engine instruments were checked while the helicopter was in a hover and no abnormalities were noted. Just as forward movement was commenced a loud noise was heard and all engine power was lost. A significant drop in rotor rpm occurred and the main rotor struck the tail boom during the subsequent forced landing. Inspection revealed a total mechanical failure of the engine compressor. The majority of compressor blades were found to be broken and the resulting degree of damage precluded identification of the location of the initial failure. However, the examination of sections of blades revealed corrosion pitting consistent with inadequate compressor washing servicing. The aircraft had been operating in a corrosive atmospheric environment and it is probable that the initial failure within the compressor resulted from corrosion induced fatigue.

The pilot had recently purchased the aircraft and intended taking it to his local aerodrome. About 20 minutes after DEPARTURE the engine suddenly lost all power and the pilot was committed to a landing on unsuitable terrain. On landing the nose and left main wheels were torn off and, the left wing main spar was broken. When inspecting the aircraft after it had come to rest, the pilot discovered a loose connection in the fuel line on the inlet side of the fuel filter bowl. The aircraft had stood disused at the DEPARTURE ALA for about two years and the pilot conducted a detailed pre-flight inspection and a test flight before DEPARTURE. The maintenance release was not readily available prior to DEPARTURE, but its inspection subsequent to the accident indicated that no maintenance inspections had been conducted on the aircraft during the previous 27 months.

The pilot was engaged in a local soaring flight when she judged that an outlanding was necessary. The wind conditions were assessed by observing dust from vehicles on a dirt road and a landing pattern was established. On final approach into a large cleared area, the pilot became aware of an increased ground speed and altered the flight path to land into rising terrain. During the landing, the right wingtip struck the ground and the glider was substantially damaged during the ensuing ground loop. On alighting from the glider, the pilot became aware of strong variable conditions that had induced a tailwind component on landing and probably caused the left wing to lift during the landing roll.

The pilot was making a night visual approach to the end of a strip which was to serve as a helipad. The pad was illuminated by the headlights of a vehicle while lights from a house and shed provided additional peripheral light sources. The pilot reported that there was considerable turbulence adjacent to high ground near the strip. The approach was being flown at an indicated airspeed of 50 knots. While passing over the high ground at a height of about 400 feet, the airspeed suddenly reduced to virtually zero and a large sink rate developed. The pilot attempted to go-around but the helicopter continued to descend until it struck the ground in a near vertical descent. The terrain and wind velocity were such that windshear over the high ground was probable. However, it was considered unlikely that this alone would have resulted in such a severe loss of airspeed. It was possible that the pilot, who had limited night flying experience, had not noticed a decay in airspeed prior to the sudden descent. If this was the case, the conditions were suitable for the aircraft to enter a vortex ring state. The fact that when the pilot increased power and collective the descent continued would also support this conclusion.

The aircraft joined the circuit for a landing on the duty runway, 06. On short final the pilot was advised that there was a 3 knot tailwind. She continued with the landing and as the tail was lowered to the runway, after touchdown, the aircraft began to accelerate and yaw to the left. Corrective action was taken and the yaw stopped. However, as the pilot applied the hand operated brake, the aircraft again yawed quickly to the left and ground-looped before coming to rest on the right wing tip and nose. During the landing the wind had changed from a light north-easterly to an 18 knot south-westerly.

The helicopter had been parked adjacent to a refuelling platform 60 millimetres high. As the pilot was bringing the aircraft to the hover prior to take-off the right skid contacted the platform. The pilot attempted to correct with cyclic but the helicopter rolled to the right and came to rest on its right side near the platform. The contact between the skid and the edge of the platform had induced dynamic rollover. The pilot had evidently not identified the problem in time to take the appropriate corrective action of lowering the collective control in order to place both skids on the ground.