Circumstances:

The pilot reported he was cruising at 300 feet over sand dunes when there was a loud bang, accompanied by a sudden loss of engine power. He immediately lowered the nose to maintain 40 knots and selected the only suitable landing area, which had a downwind component of about seven knots. Touchdown was normal but, during the landing roll, the nosewheel dug into soft sand causing the nose to drop and the gyrocopter to roll to the left, allowing the rotor to strike the ground. Examination of the two cylinder engine revealed that a stud holding the rocker gear to one cylinder head had failed, liberating the rocker gear to that cylinder. The engine manufacturer has indicated that the stud was an early design that has since been modified to eliminate the problem.

The pilot was inspecting areas of noxious weeds to check on the results of recent spraying. The helicopter struck a power line which severed the bubble windscreen. The wire then contacted the pilot's throat before being cut by the main rotor. The helicopter struck the ground tail rotor first about 35 metres beyond the point of collision. After extricating himself from the wreckage, the pilot swam across a river, walked 3 kilometres to a homestead and drove 15 kilometres for help. He was later admitted to intensive care in hospital. The pilot had been informed that there were power lines in the area, but was unaware of their precise location. He had conducted a survey flight prior to commencing the spraying operation, but had not sighted the particular cables. There was evidence to indicate that the helicopter had flown under the cables on at least one occasion while spraying. The cables, which spanned a river, were supported by poles which were 253 metres apart and which were probably outside the pilot's normal field of vision.

Circumstances:

Prior to departure for a dual instructional navigation exercise, the instructor pilot obtained a weather briefing which, although indicating marginal Visual Meteorological Conditions, he considered suitable for the exercise. In the initial stages of the flight the weather was better than expected and conditions ahead appeared to present no significant problem. Later in the flight the weather deteriorated rapidly with patches of low cloud developing. As a result, the pilot decided to carry out a landing on a dirt road which appeared suitable from the air. The approach and landing were normal until, late in the landing roll, the aircraft collided with a partly open gate which the pilot had not seen prior to landing.

The pilot reported that the windsock at the strip indicated a gusty 30 knot headwind and that he conducted the approach with full flap down and considerable power applied. As he closed the throttle and flared, the aircraft suddenly rolled to the right and dropped to the ground impacting nose wheel first. Later inspection revealed that the nose wheel leg mount had been broken and that the lower firewall and cabin floor had been damaged. Air mass thunderstorms were present in the area at the time of the accident and witnesses at the stip reported a particularly strong gust of wind exceeding 40 knots at the time of the accident. The wind direction was reported to have changed through 90 degrees shortly after the accident.

Circumstances:

The flight was normal in calm conditions until about 30 minutes from the destination. At that point, the pilot encountered what he described as severe turbulence and found maintaining control of the aircraft difficult. The pilot reported that in the circuit area the strong turbulence persisted, with up-drafts and apparent wind shear. The windsock had been blown away the previous night, but the pilot, using forecast winds and observations, assessed the wind as 350/20 and made an approach for a landing into the north. Reduced flap and increased approach speed were used to counteract the effects of the turbulence. On short final the aircraft encountered a change in wind direction, accompanied by strong gusts and shear, causing it to swing viciously to the right. The pilot attempted to continue the approach for landing, maintaining the aircraft's attitude with elevator and correcting for the swing using opposite rudder, without increasing the power. The stall warning began to sound and the right hand wing dropped. The aircraft entered a descending right hand turn, rotated through approximately 180 degrees and impacted the ground with its right hand wing tip and nose, before rolling inverted. Local inhabitants reported that severe wind shear can occur in this area when strong northerly winds mix with the afternoon southerly sea breeze. This accident was not the subject of an on-scene investigation.

The pilot reported that an approach was being made in light crosswind conditions. Touchdown was normal, but the aircraft then became airborne again. A series of bounces then followed, each larger than the last. At some point during this phase the nose strut oleo collapsed and the propeller struck the ground. The aircraft swerved off the runway and slowed to the point where the pilot was able to regain control. Subsequent examination revealed damage to the engine firewall and lower fuselage structure. The pilot was evidently surprised by the speed and severity of the bounces, and had apparently not considered making a go around. This accident was not the subject of an on scene investigation.

The right engine had been replaced as part of a routine maintenance program. During two subsequent flights the engine lost all power. Extensive ground checks failed to reproduce the symptoms and an air test was then carried out. During the test the right engine failed and while various techniques were being employed by the pilot to restore power, the left engine also failed. The pilot was committed to a gear up landing in a paddock and damage was sustained during the ground slide when a mound of dirt was struck. Faulty seals in the right engine fuel shut off valve allowed air to be drawn into the fuel lines, causing the power losses experienced. The left engine failed from fuel exhaustion and when the pilot selected crossfeed from the right tank, air was drawn through the defective valve, preventing further running of the left engine.

After the student pilot had completed 1.2 hours of dual instruction in the circuit, his instructor assessed the pilot was ready for his first solo flight. The aircraft was brought to a halt on the grass runway 09 where the instructor alighted. The subsequent takeoff roll appeared to be proceeding normally when the aircraft suddenly veered to the left, departed the runway and collided with a boundary fence. The student pilot advised that the right cabin door had opened and he lost directional control when he lent over and attempted to close the door. The instructor reported that the right hand door lock was operating normally at the time of the accident. The accident was not the subject of an on scene investigation. This report is based on information supplied by the pilot.

The helicopter was engaged in cattle mustering on Ivanhoe Station. The pilot in command was training the other pilot in aerial mustering techniques. While the helicopter was being flown at about 50 feet agl, one main rotor blade grip failed. The associated main rotor blade separated from the helicopter and the resulting imbalance caused the other main rotor blade and transmission to be torn from the helicopter. The aircraft then fell to the ground, landing on its right side. The main rotor blade grip failed due to a combination of fatigue and overload forces. Examination of the aircraft records revealed that because of a error in the recording of component hours, the 5000 hour service life of the grip had been exceeded by 687 hours. During the investigation inspections of the blade grips on several other helicopters were carried out. Fatigue cracking was revealed in a significant number of the blade grips inspected. As a result, the manufacturer of the aircraft has recommended a reduction in the service life of the component.

On final approach for his first solo circuit and landing, the pilot carried out an overshoot because the aircraft was above the desired profile. On his second approach the pilot commenced a normal flare, but the aircraft climbed gradually to about 15 feet above the ground. The pilot made no attempt to apply power for a go-around. The aircraft stalled and struck the ground heavily. The nosewheel was detached and the aircraft bounced. On the subsequent touchdown, the nosegear strut dug into the ground and the aircraft overturned, coming to rest 77 metres from the point of initial touchdown. The pilot misjudged his height above the ground after the landing flare. He is employed as a Flight Engineer on Boeing 747 aircraft, and is therefore used to looking out of a cockpit which is much higher off the ground than the cockpit of a Cessna 152. This accident was not the subject of an on-site investigation.