It was reported that the takeoff run was commenced after the pilot had run the engine to full power. The aircraft then travelled the full length of the 607 metre strip before entering light scrub. It became airborne for a distance of 48 metres before striking the ground in a nose down attitude. The landing gear was torn from the aircraft and a fire erupted in the front of the cabin before the aircraft came to rest. The pilot and passengers evacuated the aircraft before it was destroyed by fire. The strip length available for the proposed operation was inadequate. The load designated for carriage by the aircraft operator and accepted for carriage by the pilot, exceeded by approximately 345 kilograms the maximum allowable takeoff weight for the strip in the prevailing conditions. Also the takeoff performance of the aircraft was further inhibited by the takeoff being attempted with the flaps in the up position. Damage caused by the fire hampered the inspection of the wreckage. However, an examination of the fuel system found evidence of water contamination, and it is considered possible that the presence of water in the fuel system could have resulted in a reduction in engine performance during the takeoff run. No other faults that may have contributed to the accident were found. Perusal of the maintenance documentation for the aircraft found that water contamination was a problem with the aircraft, and that this pilot had recommended that a fuel drain be carried out prior to each takeoff. On this occasion no fuel drain was completed immediately prior to the attempted takeoff.

The helicopter was on late final approach when the pilot attempted to open the throttle. The engine did not respond to the throttle movement and an autorotational descent was commenced. However, the rate of descent was not arrested and the aircraft landed heavily. An inspection of the aircraft found that the bolt attaching the throttle cable to the collective/throttle linkage was missing. The bolt and nut were later found on the floor of the aircraft between the seats. The helicopter had recently been stripped and repainted but during re-assembly a cotterpin was inadvertantly left out of the throttle control linkage. A subsequent periodic inspection failed to disclose the omission. The aircraft had completed appoximately 24 flight hours since that periodic inspection.

The aircraft was being taxied on an apron between several hangars. Painted guide lines were provided to allow obstacle clearance, however the pilot had difficulty seeing the lines over the nose cowling. As the aircraft passed a parked aircraft on the right, the left wing struck a power pole. The pilot had evidently not followed the marked guide lines. The pole struck had a weathered appearance, and was not easily distinguished against the grey colour of the hangar wall. The pilot also commented that he was distracted by the presence of the parked aircraft.

The pilot was conducting a solo navigation exercise, which involved an enroute landing. Turbulence was encountered during the latter stages of the landing approach and a heavy touchdown occurred. The aircraft bounced and again touched down heavily before the pilot was able to regain control of the landing. After taxying to the parking area, the pilot discovered damage to the nosegear leg and adjacent structure. Relatively strong and gusty wind conditions existed at the time of the accident. Sink had been encountered on short final approach and the pilot had been unable to prevent a heavy touchdown.

The pilot had intended carrying out a flight around the property. When he had not returned by nightfall his parents rang neighbours before commencing a search. The wreckage of the aircraft was found two kilometres north-east of the homestead. It had struck the ground while in a steep nose-down attitude, in a paddock with no obstructions in the immediate vicinity. Investigation revealed that the engine throttle cable was broken, however it was not established whether this had occurred before or after the impact. The wreckage distribution was typical of that which follows a stall with insufficient height remaining in which to effect recovery. However, the reason the aircraft apparently stalled could not be determined.

Approaching the coastline of Wilsons Promontory, the pilot heard a loud bang from the engine compartment, which was followed by oil escaping onto the windscreen. About 40 seconds later the engine failed completely and the pilot carried out a successful ditching in about 1.2 metres of water, some 10 metres from the shoreline. The pilot and passengers waded to land and were subsequently rescued by a helicopter. The pilot had chosen to land in the water rather than attempt a landing on the beach, which appeared to be soft and was obstructed by a rocky outcrop. Examination of the engine revealed that the number 5 cylinder connecting rod had failed from fatigue. This in turn led to the overload failure of the big-end bolts.

The pilot had completed a pre-flight inspection, when he received a message to the effect that there was an unfamiliar vehicle in the vicinity of a new farm piggery, about 2 km from the strip. He boarded the aircraft, which shortly afterwards was seen to take-off and fly at low level towards the piggery. A farm employee at the piggery observed the aircraft approaching in straight and level flight and with normal engine noise. The aircraft then began to turn to the left, but struck a recently erected single wire power line at a height of 23 feet above the ground. The left wing tip and one propeller blade were severed and the aircraft cartwheeled to the ground. No defect or malfunction was subsequently discovered which might have affected the pilot's ability to safely control the aircraft. It was considered probable that the pilot was concentrating on locating and identifying the vehicle near the piggery, to the extent that he overlooked the presence of the power line. Notwithstanding the above, the reason the pilot chose to fly at such a low height could not be determined.

Prior to departure for a nearby aerodrome the pilot decided to carry out some practice night circuits. He subsequently advised that all necessary checks were completed for the first landing, however the aircraft landed with the gear retracted. When the aircraft came to rest the pilot noted that the gear hydraulic pump motor was still operating. It was determined that the aircraft had touched down on the gear doors, which were open at the time. Although the main gear doors had completed their extension cycle, a defect in the gear control valve spool prevented the gear itself from extending. Contamination of the hydraulic system was also evident, probably resulting from ineffective filtering of the fluid. The pilot had evidently not checked the gear position indicator lights prior to landing.

The pilot had been carrying out a number of flights to strips in the general area. After completing repairs to a bore pump the pilot and passenger prepared to return to the property homestead, some 20 kilometres to the North. Shortly after the take-off roll commenced, the aircraft began to veer to the right. Full left rudder was progressively applied, but directional control could not be maintained. The right wing collided with a number of bushes and saplings alongside the strip. The aircraft then slewed rapidly to the right and the nosegear collapsed. Investigation revealed that the aircraft had rolled for 104 metres before the right wing struck and broke a small sapling. This coincided with the initial veer to the right as reported by the pilot. As the aircraft diverged from the centre of the strip, it entered an area of soft loam, which increased the drag on the right wheel. The scrub struck by the aircraft had encroached onto the strip, reducing the width in places to about 15 metres. The pilot had been aware that the strip had not been cleared of undergrowth for some 21 months.

During his pre-flight inspection, the pilot detected water in the fuel samples from the various drain points. Further samples were taken until no trace of water was evident. The subsequent flight of almost 90 minutes was uneventful, until the pilot selected full flap on final approach to land. At this point the engine lost all power and during the ensuing forced landing the aircraft collided with a fence post. Investigation revealed that the fuel caps were not providing adequate sealing, and a substantial amount of water remained in the fuel system. Prior to the flight the aircraft had been parked in the open for some days and considerable amounts of rain had fallen. The water in the fuel system had most probably been trapped in wrinkles in the left fuel bladder, and had entered the engine following the attitude change associated with selection of full flap. During the previous scheduled maintenance, a mandatory inspection and leak test of the fuel tank filler caps was not carried out. The owner/pilot had frequently found evidence of water during pre-flight inspections, but had not specifically instructed the maintenance organisation to investigate and rectify the problem.