Loss of control

What happened

On 28 March 2026 at approximately 1400 local time, a Robinson R22 Beta was conducting commercial aerial mustering operations near Elliott, Northern Territory. As the helicopter was mustering cattle into a yard at about 20 ft above ground level (AGL), the tail of the helicopter contacted the ground, resulting in a loss of control. The pilot reported that they cut the throttle to settle the helicopter, landing upright but with a ‘slight yaw to the right’. As the ground underneath was uneven, the helicopter subsequently rolled over, coming to rest on its right side (Figure 1).

The helicopter sustained substantial damage to the main rotor blades, cockpit window, fuselage and tail rotor. The pilot received minor lacerations and was taken to hospital for further assessment.

Figure 1: R22 resting position

Source: Operator

Safety message

This incident highlights that low-level flying operations have a lower margin for error with minimal time to recover the aircraft in the event of a loss of control. 

Low-level flying, particularly during aerial mustering operations, is inherently high risk and therefore requires effective risk management. This should include a risk assessment to consider the hazards common to the type of operation, as well as specific to the location, to develop mitigations and reduce the chance of an accident occurring.

About this report

Decisions regarding whether to conduct an investigation, and the scope of an investigation, are based on many factors, including the level of safety benefit likely to be obtained from an investigation. For this occurrence, no investigation has been conducted and the ATSB did not verify the accuracy of the information. A brief description has been written using information supplied in the notification and any follow-up information in order to produce a short summary report, and allow for greater industry awareness of potential safety issues and possible safety actions.

What happened

On the afternoon of 28 March 2026, a Robinson R22 Beta II helicopter with the pilot and a passenger on board was conducting a private, stock monitoring flight around 55 km to the south-east of St George Airport, Queensland. The weather was reported as fine, with 20 km/h (10.8 kt) winds from the south. The pilot reported that while hovering into wind at a height of about 30 ft, they commenced a pedal turn¹ to the right, away from a line of trees. During the turn downwind, the turn rate began to increase and they were unable to arrest or control the rotation – estimating that the helicopter spun through approximately 450 degrees before it descended to heavily contact the ground. The rotating motion during ground contact resulted in the helicopter rolling onto its left side, sustaining substantial damage to the main and tail rotors, tail boom and cabin. Both pilot and passenger were able to egress through the right doorway and were uninjured.

Figure 1: Helicopter after being returned upright following the accident

Source: Helicopter operator, edited by the ATSB

Engineering examination

The helicopter was recovered and examined by maintenance personnel, with attention to the tail rotor drive train and controls. No evidence of pre-existing mechanical defects was identified, with all damage consistent with being sustained during the accident sequence.

Safety message

Unanticipated yaw

Directional (yaw) control of single main rotor helicopters is primarily achieved through the pilot’s manipulation of tail rotor thrust. The torque produced by the drive transmitted through the main rotor is counterbalanced by the tail rotor thrust, with the pilot’s control of that thrust allowing controlled movement of the helicopter about its vertical axis.

In the hover and at low forward airspeeds, several aerodynamic effects can influence the anti-torque effectiveness of the tail rotor system. These can produce yaw motions unanticipated by the pilot, and which, if not immediately arrested, can result in a loss of helicopter control. Collectively known as Loss of Tail Rotor Effectiveness (LTE) phenomena, these include:

• main rotor disk vortex interference
• weathercock stability
• tail rotor vortex ring state
• loss of translational lift.

The United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) advisory circular AC 90-95 and the Helicopter Flying Handbook - Chapter 11: Helicopter emergencies and hazards explain these effects and recommend avoiding the following flight conditions when operating at forward airspeeds below 30 kt:

• tailwinds
• out-of-ground effect hovers and high-power demand situations such as low‑speed downwind turns
• hovering in winds above 8–12 kt (especially when out-of-ground effect).

AC 90-95 recommends the following recovery actions if experiencing LTE:

• application of full pedal opposite the direction of rotation
• forward cyclic movement to increase speed
• reduction in power if altitude permits.

About this report

Decisions regarding whether to conduct an investigation, and the scope of an investigation, are based on many factors, including the level of safety benefit likely to be obtained from an investigation. For this occurrence, no investigation has been conducted and the ATSB did not verify the accuracy of the information. A brief description has been written using information supplied in the notification and any follow-up information in order to produce a short summary report, and allow for greater industry awareness of potential safety issues and possible safety actions.

What happened

On 27 March 2026, a Bell 206L helicopter was being used to transport a passenger to a remote telecommunications work site. The helicopter made a refuelling stop at Weipa Aerodrome, where the passenger was disembarked to a safe location for the refuelling. In preparation for the subsequent departure, the pilot conducted a visual inspection down both sides of the helicopter, including rechecking the fuel cap was secured and the bowser was safely stowed.

As the pilot initiated the hover for take-off, the passenger notified the pilot that the ground (tie-down) cable was moving while, simultaneously, the helicopter rolled onto its left side, due to the left skid becoming caught on the cable. The pilot and the passenger were able to exit the helicopter uninjured, however the helicopter was substantially damaged.

Figure 1: Aircraft damage

Source: Queensland Police, edited by the ATSB

Safety message

In this occurrence, the proximity of the ground tie-down cable to the helicopter’s skid was not identified during the visual inspection prior to departure from the refuelling stop. Given the significance of the consequences when a skid becomes stuck on an object during take-off, the ATSB emphasises the importance of pilots conducting thorough visual checks when parking helicopters in the vicinity of potential hazards. 

About this report

Decisions regarding whether to conduct an investigation, and the scope of an investigation, are based on many factors, including the level of safety benefit likely to be obtained from an investigation. For this occurrence, no investigation has been conducted and the ATSB did not verify the accuracy of the information. A brief description has been written using information supplied in the notification and any follow-up information in order to produce a short summary report, and allow for greater industry awareness of potential safety issues and possible safety actions.

What happened

On the afternoon of 5 March 2026, a Gippsland Aeronautics GA8 Airvan, with a pilot and 4 passengers on board, prepared to depart Atauro Island airstrip, Timor-Leste, for a medical transport flight to Dili, Timor-Leste. At 1214 local time, the aircraft departed runway 01 into a 5 kt headwind. Soon after taking off, the aircraft encountered turbulence and the pilot turned right, away from the nearby terrain that was likely creating the turbulence. 

As the aircraft climbed to about 600 ft above mean sea level (AMSL) with climb power selected, the aircraft encountered severe turbulence with an associated downdraft. Control of the aircraft was briefly lost and a dash mat lifted off the glareshield, striking the pilot in the face, with dust from the dash mat temporarily impairing the pilot’s vision.

The aircraft descended toward the ocean surface and the pilot increased engine power to full, in an attempt to arrest the rate of descent. Despite this, the aircraft continued descending toward the water and the terrain awareness and warning system generated a ‘pull up’ alert.

The descent continued until the aircraft was about 150 ft AMSL, when the pilot was able to arrest the descent and reestablish a climb. As the aircraft climbed above 1,000 ft AMSL, the pilot observed that the flight instrumentation indicated a north westerly wind of 45 kt. The flight then continued to Dili and landed without further incident. There were no reported injuries and the aircraft was not damaged.

Turbulence

Mountainous terrain lies to the north and west of the Atauro Island airstrip (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Atauro Island

Source: Google Earth, annotated by the ATSB

The Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority Avsafety card, Turbulencedescribes turbulence types associated with mountainous terrain (Figure 2):

• Mechanical turbulence occurs when air flow is forced to diverge around or converge through gaps in natural barriers like hills, or obstructions like buildings.
• Orographic turbulence is caused by the large-scale displacement of airflow by natural structures such as mountains and islands. Mountain waves are likely to form when the following atmospheric conditions are present:
  • the wind flow at around ridge height is nearly perpendicular to the ridge line and at least 25kts
  • the wind speed increases with height
  • there is a stable layer at around ridge height.

As the air is forced over the mountain it will descend in the lee and then oscillate in a series of waves, sometimes for long distances. Mountain wave severe forecasts indicate a downdraft of 600fpm or more.

Figure 2: Mechanical turbulence and mountain waves

Source: Bureau of Meteorology

Safety action

Following the incident, the operator conducted a review of operational wind limitations for operations at Atauro Island airstrip. The airstrip notes were also updated to include seasonal hazards associated with the surrounding terrain, including turbulence and potential windshear.

The operator also inspected all aircraft to ensure that no unapproved dash mats were fitted and that approved dash mats were secure and free of debris. In addition, a review was being conducted of the maintenance schedule to determine if a specific dash mat inspection was required. Lastly, the paint scheme specification was being updated to add a specific dashboard paint and location for the dash mat velcro loops.

Safety message

To avoid unexpected encounters with severe turbulence, the Flight Safety Australia article Mountain flying: unconsidered factors encourages pilots to visualise the flow of air around and above terrain, especially when the winds are strong and when the air is stable.

About this report

Decisions regarding whether to conduct an investigation, and the scope of an investigation, are based on many factors, including the level of safety benefit likely to be obtained from an investigation. For this occurrence, no investigation has been conducted and the ATSB did not verify the accuracy of the information. A brief description has been written using information supplied in the notification and any follow-up information in order to produce a short summary report, and allow for greater industry awareness of potential safety issues and possible safety actions.

What happened

On 28 February 2026, a pilot was conducting a private flight from Orange, New South Wales, to a privately‑owned, unsealed airstrip near Louth, New South Wales, with one passenger on board. During approach, the pilot observed gusting winds and localised whirlwind activity in close proximity to the runway. 

As the aircraft decelerated through approximately 30 to 25 kts during the landing roll, the aircraft yawed to the left with an increasing gust of wind. The pilot applied right rudder in an attempt to arrest the yaw, however a stronger second gust occurred, increasing the pressure on the rudder and pushing the aircraft further into a left yaw. 

With full brakes applied and rudder authority reduced, the aircraft’s left main wheel sank into soft ground at the runway edge and the aircraft ground looped[1] to the left. The right landing gear collapsed and the right wing and propeller impacted the ground resulting in substantial damage to the wing, landing gear and propeller. 

Figure 1: Aircraft wreckage

Source: Airstrip owner, annotated by the ATSB

Safety message

Pilots must ensure that the weather conditions surrounding the selected landing area are continuously assessed visually throughout the approach phase of flight. Should there be any unfavourable weather conditions that may impact the aircraft’s stability and controllability, conducting a go-around will allow time to plan for how to manage the landing conditions.  

The ATSB also reminds all pilots of the importance of planning, and evaluating the local weather conditions, prior to departure. A comprehensive assessment of the weather conditions at the intended point of landing is encouraged.

About this report

Decisions regarding whether to conduct an investigation, and the scope of an investigation, are based on many factors, including the level of safety benefit likely to be obtained from an investigation. For this occurrence, no investigation has been conducted and the ATSB did not verify the accuracy of the information. A brief description has been written using information supplied in the notification and any follow-up information in order to produce a short summary report, and allow for greater industry awareness of potential safety issues and possible safety actions.

What happened

On 17 January 2026, the pilot and sole occupant of a Robinson R22 Beta II helicopter was conducting contracted stock mustering operations at a station, about 140 km north of Tennant Creek, Northern Territory. At about 0900 local time, the pilot refuelled the helicopter, filling the tanks to their capacity. Shortly after, they became airborne to continue with the mustering operation. 

At about 0910, the pilot reported that while moving cattle through a gate, they conducted a right turn at about 35 kt and 120 ft above ground level. About 3 seconds after completing the turn, the pilot recalled hearing an unusual noise and suspected a possible bird strike with the tail rotor, perceiving no response to their anti-torque pedal inputs.

The pilot recalled that the low rotor RPM horn then sounded and the helicopter began to lose height. They reacted by lowering the collective in an attempt to regain the rotor RPM and attempted to gain forward airspeed. As the helicopter approached the ground the pilot flared and raised the collective[1] to reduce the rate of descent but the helicopter collided heavily with the terrain (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Occurrence helicopter

Source: Operator

On contact with the ground, the helicopter’s main rotor blades flexed and contacted the tail boom causing it to separate. The tail boom, attached tail rotor gearbox and tail rotor were located about 30 m from the main wreckage (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Occurrence aircraft tail boom, and tail assembly

Source: Operator

The pilot wore a flight helmet and was restrained with a 3-point lap and sash harness and was able to free themselves from the wreckage uninjured. However, the helicopter was substantially damaged.

The operator conducted a post-accident engineering analysis of the wreckage and reported there were no indications of pre-impact defects or damage to the tail rotor flight control system that would have resulted in a loss of tail rotor control.

The operator advised that impact marks on the ground indicated that the helicopter was travelling in a west‑north-west direction when it impacted the ground and reported the wind direction at the time of the occurrence was 10–15 kt from the south-east, indicating that the helicopter was likely operating downwind when it impacted the terrain.

Following discussions with the pilot, the operator reported that additional weight after refuelling, combined with a loss of airspeed when turning downwind, likely led to the helicopter being overpitched. The operator considered that this likely caused a reduction in rotor RPM that was not immediately identified by the pilot. The loss of rotor RPM caused the helicopter to descend from a low height and the pilot was unable to recover the low rotor RPM or arrest the rate of descent prior to impacting the ground. 

Additionally, the operator reported that the pilot had been listening to music during the low level operation, and identified that this may have reduced the pilot’s ability to aurally detect a reduction of the engine and rotor RPM prior to the low rotor RPM horn sounding. This may have reduced the pilot’s reaction and recovery time for a low rotor RPM condition. Robinson Helicopter’s Safety Notice 10 provides guidance on the recovery technique for low rotor RPM.

Safety action

The operator reported the following safety recommendations for company pilots:

• not to turn the helicopter downwind while at low altitude
• the importance of throttle control and to be aware of manually overriding the engine governor
• awareness of the helicopters engine RPM and listening for audible cues
• fuel load management and consideration given to all-up weight when conducting low-level flight.

Additionally, the operator advised that a notice was sent to all company pilots advising that listening to music while flying was not permitted, reiterating the importance of audible cues from the helicopter engine.

Safety message

The ATSB SafetyWatch highlights the broad safety concerns that come out of our investigation findings and from the occurrence data reported to us by industry. One of the safety concerns is Reducing the severity of injuries in accidents involving small aircraft | ATSB

The operator’s safe work method statements required company pilots to wear flight helmets when conducting mustering operations. The use of flight helmets reduces the risk and severity of head injuries, especially important when conducting low-level and other higher risk flight operations.

Flight at low level is a necessity during mustering operations and often involves abrupt manoeuvres with frequent power changes. Although the R22 engine is equipped with a governor to maintain constant engine RPM, large abrupt power changes can cause the governor to lag, reducing engine RPM and therefore rotor RPM. Pilots, especially during periods of high workload, have been known to grip the throttle control tightly, overriding the governor and preventing the governor from maintaining a constant engine RPM. Operators who routinely conduct low level flight are encouraged to review their training and checking regarding engine RPM management as well as the recovery techniques from a low rotor RPM condition.

About this report

Decisions regarding whether to conduct an investigation, and the scope of an investigation, are based on many factors, including the level of safety benefit likely to be obtained from an investigation. For this occurrence, no investigation has been conducted and the ATSB did not verify the accuracy of the information. A brief description has been written using information supplied in the notification and any follow-up information in order to produce a short summary report, and allow for greater industry awareness of potential safety issues and possible safety actions.

What happened

On the afternoon of 12 November 2025, an American Champion Aircraft Corp 7GCBC with a tailwheel landing gear was conducting a dual training flight with an instructor and a student on board. After completing air work at a different location, the aircraft approached runway 24 at Camden Airport, New South Wales, for circuit training. 

During approach, instruction was provided to the student until the aircraft reached 600 ft, at which point the instructor then took over the controls. After conducting a standard approach, the pilot flared the aircraft as it reached the threshold. A gust of wind occurred just prior to contact with the runway resulting in the aircraft being pushed to the right. 

One main wheel struck the runway and the instructor reported that it seemed to ‘dig in’, resulting in the aircraft turning to the right significantly. The right wheel contacted the grass next to the runway and the instructor attempted to return the aircraft to the centreline, however the aircraft swung to the left resulting in a ground loop on the runway. 

The aircraft sustained substantial damage to the right wing, fuselage and landing gear. 

Safety message

Tailwheel aircraft are more susceptible to the effects of wind gusts during landing and can be more difficult for pilots to maintain directional control. If environmental conditions during the approach become challenging or unfavourable, initiating an early go-around will allow time to plan for how to manage the landing conditions and reconfigure the aircraft for a second approach. 

About this report

Decisions regarding whether to conduct an investigation, and the scope of an investigation, are based on many factors, including the level of safety benefit likely to be obtained from an investigation. For this occurrence, no investigation has been conducted and the ATSB did not verify the accuracy of the information. A brief description has been written using information supplied in the notification and any follow-up information in order to produce a short summary report, and allow for greater industry awareness of potential safety issues and possible safety actions.

What happened

On 30 October 2025, the owner of a De Havilland DH-82A Tiger Moth was conducting circuit operations with an instructor at an aircraft landing area in regional Victoria as part of an aircraft type familiarisation. The flight involved practice of the wheel landing technique,[1] as the owner advised their previous tailwheel aircraft experience was limited to three-point landings.[2]

The owner and instructor both reported that at the time of the occurrence, the weather conditions were clear with negligible wind.

During the fourth touch-and-go, while in the ground-roll, the pilot flying (owner) abruptly applied full power and forward stick. The aircraft pitched forward, lifting the tail above the normal attitude for take-off and the propeller struck the ground. The aircraft subsequently nosed over, coming to a stop inverted. The instructor noted that they did not react quickly enough to arrest this movement as their attention was diverted to monitoring the pilot flying’s directional control during the landing and take-off sequence. 

The aircraft sustained substantial damage to the vertical stabiliser, wings, fuel tank and fuselage (Figure 1), however, the occupants were uninjured.

Shortly after the occurrence, the pilot flying questioned the configuration of the DH-82A’s automatic slats at the time of the nose over. The instructor advised the ATSB that when the slats are in the unlocked position, the DH-82A can be more challenging to handle during wheel landings. Prior to the fourth touch-and-go, the slats had been configured in the locked position. However, during the final touch-and-go, the slats were unlocked, changing the handling characteristics. This change in slat configuration by the pilot flying had not been briefed prior to the flight.

Figure 1: Aircraft inverted post-occurrence

Safety message

This occurrence highlights the challenges when operating tailwheel aircraft due to their unique handling characteristics. In particular, the typical placement of the main landing gear in front of the centre of gravity endows the aircraft with a sensitivity in pitch movement. This can result in pitch excursions and nose-over accidents during take-off or touch-and-go landings should pilots not remain fully cognisant of this behaviour.

These characteristics can be further exacerbated with the use of secondary flight controls such as wing flaps, slats and trim systems. Prior to training flights, pilots and instructors must brief the scope of the operation and discuss any changes that may be made, especially those that affect the flying characteristics of an aircraft.

It is also important for instructors conducting training and familiarisation flights to maintain effective awareness of the aircraft’s state and ensure they are prepared to rapidly intervene should the pilot flying experience control difficulties. This is particularly important during critical phases of flight such as the take-off.

About this report

Decisions regarding whether to conduct an investigation, and the scope of an investigation, are based on many factors, including the level of safety benefit likely to be obtained from an investigation. For this occurrence, no investigation has been conducted and the ATSB did not verify the accuracy of the information. A brief description has been written using information supplied in the notification and any follow-up information in order to produce a short summary report, and allow for greater industry awareness of potential safety issues and possible safety actions.

What happened

On 21 October 2025, a Robinson R22 helicopter with one pilot on board was conducting a private flight from Jimboomba to Southport, Queensland.

Prior to departure, the pilot loaded a box of freight, approximately 1,000 mm long, 350 mm wide and 400 mm deep, weighing 10 kg, onto the passenger seat and secured it by wrapping the seatbelt around the box. The flight departed Jimboomba at 1033 local time with a flight time of approximately 12 minutes.

As the pilot turned onto the base leg for final approach to runway 01 at Southport, the box on the passenger seat shifted and interfered with the cyclic[1] control resulting in the helicopter being unable to turn left. The helicopter then veered to the right and as the pilot focused their attention on moving the box, they lost control of the helicopter which came into contact with trees before colliding with terrain, resulting in substantial damage (Figure 1). The pilot sustained serious injuries in the accident.

Figure 1: Post-impact damage

Source: Queensland Police, annotated by the ATSB

Safety message

Pilots must adhere to CASA Regulation 91.610 (2) (b) Carriage of cargo – unoccupied seats, which states that the cargo, and the means of restraint of the cargo, must not interfere with the safe operation of the aircraft.

The ATSB has had 3 occurrences reported in a 15-year period involving Robinson R22 helicopters carrying cargo on the passenger seat which has interfered with the helicopter’s flight controls. All 3 of these occurrences resulted in a collision with terrain and substantial damage. 

About this report

Decisions regarding whether to conduct an investigation, and the scope of an investigation, are based on many factors, including the level of safety benefit likely to be obtained from an investigation. For this occurrence, no investigation has been conducted and the ATSB did not verify the accuracy of the information. A brief description has been written using information supplied in the notification and any follow-up information in order to produce a short summary report, and allow for greater industry awareness of potential safety issues and possible safety actions.