[3] In 1966, GAF contacted the Australian Army, seeking feedback on their proposal, which was of a single-engined turboprop-powered aircraft that could replace existing assets such as the American Cessna 180 and the Swiss Pilatus PC-6 Porter.

In the civil sector, an envisioned crop-dusting variant, viewed by GAF as a counterpart to the successful de Havilland Canada DHC-2 Beaver, was pitched to potential agricultural operators; they largely favoured using two engines, and noted that it ought to possess greater endurance and "hot-and-high" performance.

An original intention was that the entire rear fuselage would be hinged so that it could be swung open, providing generous rear-loading access to accommodate its target payload of a compact road vehicle; this choice necessitated the adoption of a raised cruciform tail.

The new design was viewed as being a direct rival of existing products on the market from manufactures such as Britten-Norman, Shorts and de Havilland Canada.

According to aerospace periodical Flight International, it was apparent even at an early stage of the project that the programme could not be realistically accomplished without financial assistance from the Australian government, partly because the nation lacked a large domestic market.

[4] Furthermore, the twin-engined aircraft was viewed as a somewhat of a natural successor to the earlier DHA-3 Drover, a trimotor passenger airliner which had been built by de Havilland Australia.

A minor issue affecting the retraction of the undercarriage was quickly rectified, while directional stability was augmented by a 30 per cent increase in the area of both the fin and rudder.

Reportedly, safety concerns raised included fatigue issues with the tailplane, incorrect strength calculations having been used, and multiple questions surrounding the aircraft's overall aerodynamic stability and airworthiness.

[5] During 1985, production of the Nomad was terminated; in total, only 172 aircraft (including the two prototypes) were manufactured, largely due to the limited number of foreign sales that had been secured by GAF.

[9] In June 2008, Gippsland Aeronautics (now Mahindra Aerospace) announced it had won bidding to take over the Nomad's type certificate; the company also stated that it would probably be restarting production of new aircraft at some point.

[10] Prior to this acquisition, some of the GippsAero design and testing engineers, including the company's co-founder George Morgan, had worked for GAF during the Nomad's development.

Key features of the Nomad's general configuration included its rugged and straightforward design, STOL performance, its compact and economic engines and its relatively unobstructed and flat cabin floor.

[5] It had been designed to meet or exceed established military requirements of the era, as well as in compliance with regulations set out in the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) FAR Part 23.

[3] According to Flight International, the adoption of a retractable undercarriage was a relatively unusual feature for an aircraft of this type; GAF designers selected this arrangement as to avoid excessive aerodynamic drag while enabling the use of large, widely spaced low-pressure tyres, these being key to allowing for rough field operations.

GAF suggested that a swing-tail variant could be easily produced due to an intentionally-designed manufacturing joint in the rear-fuselage that could act as a break point.

[5] The Nomad also possesses a greater maximum cruise speed than most other strut-braced competitors, save for the de Havilland Canada DHC-6 Twin Otter.

In 1989 the RAAF acquired a former Coastwatch Nomad Searchmaster and three N24As; one had been a GAF/ASTA test frame and two were from a cancelled order for United States Customs Service.

[19] Subsequently, Indonesia acquired a pair of N24As from the RAAF during 1993, quickly followed by 14 N22B and four N24A from the Australian Army in 1995; these were largely operated for aerial surveillance purposes.