During the takeoff run, the pilot reported that the aircraft encountered a crosswind from the left. Despite the application of left rudder and aileron the aircraft continued to drift towards the right of the strip. The pilot attempted to manoeuvre the aircraft over a gable marker but one of the mainwheels struck the marker and caused the aircraft to turn further to the right. The aircraft continued and the lower right wing was torn off after it struck a fence post. The aircraft came to rest 13 metres beyond the boundary fence. During the takeoff the wind velocity had changed appreciably and the aircraft had drifted well to the right of the strip before the pilot had attempted to take corrective action. The takeoff was not abandoned until after the aircraft had struck the fence.

The pilot was conducting a navigational exercise from Benalla to Benalla via overhead Tocumwal N.S.W. The wind conditions were northerly and gusting. The pilot realised he would be unable to effect a return and decided to outland. A paddock was chosen which appeared suitable and provided a good landing run into wind. However the paddock had been ploughed and grass had grown to 0.3 metres high. Following touchdown well into the field the combination of rough ground medium high grass and heavy braking caused the glider to ground loop breaking the rear fuselage as it did so. This accident was not the subject of an on-site investigation.

The pilot reported that on late final approach he lost all visual reference due to sunglare. He decided to carry out a go-around but heard a loud noise and the helicopter started to rotate. He was able to fly the aircraft clear of the platform before it descended into the sea. As the aircraft sank the pilot exited through the left door and after inflating his life jacket swam to the platform. Witnesses on the platform reported that the tail rotor struck the platform. No fault was found with the aircraft that may have contributed to the occurrence. It is considered likely that on encountering the loss of visual reference, the pilot inadvertently placed the helicopter in a tail-low attitude causing the tail section to strike the platform. This accident was not the subject of an on-site investigation.

During the final approach the aircraft became low and the right wing struck a tree. The aircraft turned sharply to the right and skidded sideways for 43 metres before coming to rest in the undershoot area. After completing the left base turn, the pilot thought that he was too high on the approach. He elected not to use flap or airbrake but turned the glider to the right, away from the strip. When he again turned left to assume a new base leg he realised that he had descended further than expected and immediately turned onto an oblique final. On final it was realised that a strong headwind was present which reduced the achievable gliding distance and resulted in the aircraft undershooting the strip.

At a height of about 100 feet after takeoff, the engine faltered briefly. It then returned to full power, but the pilot decided to conduct a low level circuit and land in order to investigate the apparent anomaly. On the downwind leg the engine stopped and the pilot was committed to a wheels-up landing in a paddock. Shortly before touchdown engine power was regained and the propeller contacted the ground under almost full power. The pilot later advised that he had inadvertently selected an almost empty fuel tank prior to takeoff. He had not checked the fuel selector when the first loss of power was noticed, because he had been convinced that he had selected the correct tank.

The pilot was carrying out a period of solo circuit training, after having completed three check circuits with an instructor. On the second landing, the aircraft bounced, then touched down again heavily on the nosewheel. The nosegear leg failed due to overload and the aircraft ran off the runway. The pilot was attempting to carry out a short field landing and misjudged the flare. He stated that following the bounce, the nose of the aircraft dropped and he was unable to regain the landing attitude before the nosewheel struck the runway. This accident was not the subject of an on-site investigation.

After the gear was selected down, no down indication was received for the right gear leg. The pilot decided to divert to Port Hedland where engineering advice was available. When it was decided that all the options were exhausted, the pilot landed the aircraft. As the right wheel contacted the ground the leg collapsed and the aircraft slid to a stop. The right maingear retract ram had become disconnected from the body of the gear leg when an improperly secured clevis caused the failure of the body fitting to which it was connected. The components had been incorrectly assembled during previous maintenance.

The helicopter had been transported by road to Schofields to form part of the static display associated with an air show. Although it was airworthy, the helicopter was the only one of its type in the country and had not been approved for flight at the show. At the conclusion of the show, one of the persons responsible for the restoration of the aircraft became concerned for its security, and he elected to hover taxy the helicopter a short distance onto Naval property. He had never received any formal helicopter flying instruction and control of the aircraft was lost shortly after it became airborne. The helicopter struck the ground while moving backwards and came to rest on its side some 60 metres from the parked position.

The pilot reported that the aircraft brakes were serviceable prior to DEPARTURE. However, when braking was attempted during the landing roll there was no reaction, and no pressure was felt through the brake handle. The aircraft overran the end of the strip and collided with a fence. The brake master cylinder valve seal had failed, allowing the piston to extend further into the cylinder than normal. The piston had in turn become jammed by corrosion products.

The original propeller fitted to the aircraft had been damaged in a landing mishap, and the owner/pilot ordered a replacement from the aircraft manufacturer. The new propeller was of different dimensions and weight to the original, and the owner sought and obtained the manufacturer's assurance that it was suitable for the aircraft type. A number of static and taxy trials were completed without problem. However, on the first take-off, the aircraft had reached a height of about 50 feet when the propeller failed. The aircraft pitched down and struck the ground. A subsequent examination of the propeller revealed that it had failed as a result of the applied centrifugal forces. It had been constructed in four laminations, using two types of wood. One lamination contained a large knot in the hub area, and it was probable that another lamination was affected by brittleheart. This weakness is characterised by minute compression failures in the walls of the fibres, induced by growth stresses in the particular tree. When the propeller failed the aircraft was at a critical stage of flight, and stalled. There was insufficient height available for the pilot to regain control before impact with the ground.