Circumstances:

The pilot reported that the aircraft's park brake was unserviceable, but the foot brakes were serviceable on departure from Greenhills. Whilst taxiing to the parking area, after landing at Jandakot, the brakes failed completely. In an attempt to avoid a ditch and parked aircraft, the pilot started a 180 degree turn using the rudders. After approximately 90 degrees, the aircraft collided with a parked Cessna 310. At no stage prior to the collision did the pilot attempt to stop the aircraft by shutting the engine down.

The aircraft was one of a group attending a vintage aircraft fly-in. It had been engaged on a photographic flight in company with another aircraft, in an area west of the Hunter River. During the return to the strip, the two aircraft became separated. The subject aircraft was observed to descend to a low height over the river, while apparently tracking for a right base leg position. It subsequently collided with powerlines and trees before falling to the ground about 1.5 kilometres from the strip. The powerlines consisted of three cables strung on individual poles. The span which crossed the river was about 645 metres in length, and the height of the cables at the point of collision was 35 metres above the river level. The weather at the time was fine, with no restrictions to visibility. However, the wires were difficult to see against the background, and the pilot had not been aware that there were any powerlines in the vicinity.

The pilot was conducting agricultural spraying operations on a paddock 1400 metres long, with two sets of powerlines and a highway at one end. A person was deployed at each end of the paddock to provide tracking guidance to the pilot. As he approached the powerlines at spray height, the pilot observed the marker commence moving from the aircraft flight path, so he fixed his attention on the powerlines. Shortly afterwards the marker was struck on the left side of the head, by the left wing of the aircraft. The investigation revealed that the marker was not facing the aircraft at the time of the accident. He was experienced in the task, and the reason for his failure to maintain an adequate lookout, or to move out of the flight path of the aircraft, could not be established. However, it is considered possible that the marker may have turned to check for road traffic on the highway adjacent to the powerlines. In so doing, he turned his field of vision from the approaching aircraft.

Circumstances:

The pilot had been cleared to transit the Coolangatta control zone southbound at 2000 feet. He was instructed to remain east of the coast and to report abeam Jupiters Casino. The pilot subsequently reported abeam the Coolangatta Control Tower and was instructed to report again at Hastings Point which is the southern boundary of the control zone. A Bandeirante aircraft inbound to Coolangatta was descending through 2200 feet, about seven miles south of the airport, when the crew saw a Cessna on a reciprocal heading pass below the right wing. The pilot of the Cessna had not complied with the instruction to remain over water and passed in close proximity to the opposite direction traffic. The pilot of the Cessna did not see the Bandeirante and said that the radio was difficult to understand as his headphones were not compatible with radio. The Cessna was on a ferry flight to Tasmania, and the pilot who was 79 years of age said he was not familiar with Coolangatta airspace.

Significant Factors:

The following factors were considered relevant to the development of the incident:

1. The pilot was unfamiliar with the local airspace.

2. The pilot misunderstood the terms of his airways clearance. The aircraft radio was not compatible with his headphones and as a result he had difficulty understanding the radio. This incident was not the subject of an on-scene investigation.

The pilot reported that the takeoff was being conducted in a crosswind which he estimated was from the left at 10-15 knots. The surface of the 10 metre wide strip was covered in loose gravel. At the beginning of the takeoff roll, the aircraft began to weathercock to the left. The pilot continued, believing that directional control would improve as aircraft speed increased. However, this did not occur and the aircraft ground-looped, striking an embankment at the edge of the strip. The pilot reported that the aircraft was equipped with a small tailwheel which had limited effectiveness on the soft loose surface. Also, the aircraft was a late model Thruster aircraft which had a greater keel surface than earlier models because of its enclosed fuselage. This was the first time the pilot had operated the aircraft in crosswind conditions. The operating manual for the aircraft indicates a demonstrated crosswind capability of 15 knots. This accident was not the subject of a formal on scene investigation.

The pilot reported that he rolled the aircraft out of a turn at 4000 feet and then the engine spluttered and stopped. Trouble checks including advice from the base station failed to restore engine power. In the ensuing forced landing, the aircraft was apparently flared too high and it bounced heavily twice resulting in the collapse of the nosegear. An engine run and inspection of components failed to detect the cause of the loss of power but a detailed laboratory inspection of the ignition switch confirmed the cause of the engine failure. This inspection detected an intermittency in the ignition/magneto switch internal wiring when subject to vibration. The ignition key had a heavy metal clip attached to it and it is believed that the inertia of this clip on rollout from the turn was sufficient to interrupt the electrical continuity within the magneto switch and cause the engine failure.

It was reported that the pilot lost control of the glider and landed heavily while operating in winds of 25-30 knots.

The instructor pilot was being checked by the club chief flying instructor (CFI). After completing some work in the local training area the aircraft was returned to the circuit area where the CFI took over the controls so that the instructor-under-check could demonstrate his instructional technique. As the aircraft approached the ground for the first landing the instructor told the CFI to "round out and hold the aircraft off". The CFI pulled back on the control column but the rate of descent was not fully arrested and the aircraft touched down heavily and bounced. The CFI pushed the control forward and the aircraft touched down again and bounced. The control column was again pushed forward and the aircraft again bounced after touching down. The aircraft then landed in a nose-down attitude and the left landing gear leg failed. The aircraft slid about 10 metres before coming to rest. This accident was not the subject of an on-site investigation.

The aircraft was running low on fuel so the pilot elected to land in a paddock close to a town. The wind at the time was west-north-westerly with a strength of about 30 knots. Just before touchdown the pilot felt a gust of wind from the south-west and attempted to correct for the drift. The right landing gear struck a ridge and was torn from the aircraft. This accident was not the subject of a formal on scene investigation.

The aircraft was taking off from a one-way agricultural strip during spreading operations. As the aircraft became airborne it suffered a complete loss of engine power. The pilot dumped the load and landed the aircraft on the strip remaining. During the landing roll the pilot was forced to swerve the aircraft onto an adjacent cleared area to avoid a gully beyond the strip end. At a low forward speed, the right main landing gear struck a stump. The aircraft groundlooped, collapsing the left main gear and damaging the outer left wing. No mechanical defect of the engine was found. Although vapour lock was suspected, the cause of the loss of power was not determined.