If you wish to contribute or participate in the discussions about articles you are invited to join SKYbrary as a registered user



From SKYbrary Wiki

Name Dash 8 Q400
Manufacturer BOMBARDIER
Body Narrow
Wing Fixed Wing
WTC Medium
Type code L2T
Engine Turboprop
Engine count Multi
Mass group 4

Manufacturered as:





Short range commuter airliner. In service since 1999. Further stretched and higher performance member of the Dash 8 series, with new quieter engines and computer controlled noise and vibration suppression system. Type designation with a Q for quiet. Sharing production with MITSUBISHI, Japan.

Technical Data

Wing span 28.4 m93.176 ft <br />
Length 32.81 m107.644 ft <br />
Height 8.3 m27.231 ft <br />
Powerplant 2 x 5071 SHP P&W PW150A turboprops with 6 blade Dowty propellers - 4.11 meters in diameter.
Engine model Pratt & Whitney Canada PW100

Performance Data

Take-Off Initial Climb
(to 5000 ft)
Initial Climb
(to FL150)
Initial Climb
(to FL240)
MACH Climb Cruise Initial Descent
(to FL240)
(to FL100)
Descent (FL100
& below)
V2 (IAS) kts IAS kts IAS kts IAS kts MACH TAS 360 kts MACH IAS kts IAS kts Vapp (IAS) kts
Distance 1220 m ROC ft/min ROC ft/min ROC ft/min ROC ft/min MACH 0.62 ROD ft/min ROD ft/min MCS kts Distance 1293 m
MTOW 2860028,600 kg <br />28.6 tonnes <br /> kg Ceiling FL270 ROD ft/min APC C
WTC M Range 12901,290 nm <br />2,389,080 m <br />2,389.08 km <br />7,838,188.982 ft <br /> NM

Accidents & Serious Incidents involving DH8D

  • B733 / DH8D, Fort McMurray Canada, 2014 (On 4 August 2014, a Boeing 737-300 making a day visual approach at Fort McMurray after receiving an ILS/DME clearance lined up on a recently-constructed parallel taxiway and its crew were only alerted to their error shortly before touchdown by the crew of a DHC8-400 which was taxiing along the same taxiway in the opposite direction. This resulted in a go around being commenced from 46 feet agl. The Investigation noted that both pilots had been looking out during the final stages of the approach and had ignored important SOPs including that for a mandatory go around from an unstable approach.)
  • B763/DH8D, Fukuoka Japan, 2010 (On 10 May 2010, the TWR controller at Fukuoka cleared a Bombardier DHC8-400 to land on runway 16 and then a minute later whilst it was still on approach cleared a Boeing 767-300 to line up and take off on the same runway. Only a query from approaching aircraft which had been cleared to land prompted by hearing a take off clearance being given for the same runway alerted ATC to the simultaneous runway use clearances. As it was too late to stop the departing aircraft at the holding point, its clearance was changed to “line up and wait” and the approaching aircraft was instructed to go around.)
  • DH8D / B735, Exeter UK, 2009 (On 30 October 2009, a Bombardier DHC8-400 departing Exeter at night failed to stop as cleared at the runway 08 holding point and continued onto the runway on which a Boeing 737-500 had just touched down on in the opposite direction. The Investigation attributed the DHC8-400 crew error to distraction arising from failure to follows SOPs and poor monitoring of the Captain taxiing the aircraft by the First Officer. The failure of the DHC8 crew to immediately report the occurrence to Flybe, which had resulted in non-availability of relevant CVR data to the Investigation was also noted.)
  • DH8D / B737, Winnipeg Canada, 2014 (On 4 August 2014, the crew of a DHC8-400 departing Winnipeg continued beyond the holding point to which they had been cleared to taxi as a B737-700 was about to land. ATC observed the daylight incursion visually and instructed the approaching aircraft to go around as the DHC8 stopped within the runway protected area but clear of the actual runway. The Investigation found that the surface marking of the holding point which had been crossed was "significantly degraded" and noted the daily airport inspections had failed to identify this.)
  • DH8D / B772, vicinity Sydney Australia, 2016 (On 9 December 2016, a Bombardier DHC8-400 departing Sydney lost prescribed separation against an inbound Boeing 777-200 after its crew failed to ensure that the aircraft levelled as cleared at 5,000 feet and this was exceeded by 600 feet. The Investigation found that the First Officer, as Pilot Flying, had disconnected the autopilot prior to routinely changing the selected airspeed because it tended to disconnect when this was done with altitude capture mode active but had then failed to re-engage it. The Captain's lack of effective monitoring was attributed to distraction as he sought to visually acquire the conflicting traffic.)
  • DH8D / DH8D, vicinity Sudbury ON Canada, 2016 (On 14 October 2016, two Bombardier DHC8-400s received coordinated TCAS RAs as they came into opposite direction conflict near Sudbury, an uncontrolled airport, as one was descending inbound and emerging from an overcast layer and the other was level just below that layer after departing. Both aircraft crews ignored their RAs and their respective visual manoeuvring brought them to within 0.4nm at the same altitude. The Investigation noted that the conflict had occurred in Class ‘E’ airspace after the departing aircraft had cancelled IFR to avoid a departure delay attributable to the inbound IFR aircraft.)
  • DH8D / TOR, en-route, North Sea UK, 2008 (On 13 October 2008, a DHC-8 Q400 operating in uncontrolled airspace and in receipt of civil radar advisory service was given an avoiding action turn against military traffic but then received and actioned a TCAS RA whilst inside a notified Danger Area as a result of the avoiding action turn. No close proximity to other traffic resulted.)
  • DH8D, Aalborg Denmark, 2007 (On 9 September 2007 the crew of an SAS Bombardier DHC8-400 approaching Aalborg were unable to lock the right MLG down and prepared accordingly. During the subsequent landing, the unlocked gear leg collapsed and the right engine propeller blades struck the runway. Two detached completely and penetrated the passenger cabin injuring one passenger. The Investigation found that the gear malfunction had been caused by severe corrosion of a critical connection and noted that no scheduled maintenance task included appropriate inspection. A Safety Recommendation to the EASA to review the design, certification and maintenance of the assembly involved was made.)
  • DH8D, Bournemouth UK, 2010 (On 30 November 2010, a Bombardier DHC8-400 being operated by Flybe on a scheduled passenger flight from an unrecorded origin to Southampton was unable to select any trailing edge flaps when preparing for the intended landing at destination. The night non precision approach in VMC was discontinued and a diversion was made to Bournemouth where a longer runway with an ILS procedure was available for the necessary flapless landing and during the subsequent touchdown, a tail strike occurred. None of the 73 occupants were injured and damage to the aircraft was minor.)
  • DH8D, Chania Greece, 2010 (On 23 February 2010, a Bombardier DHC8-400 being operated by Flybe for Olympic Air on a scheduled passenger flight from Athens to Chania unintentionally made an approach at destination in day VMC towards a landing on a part of the runway which was closed and only corrected the profile shortly before touchdown to achieve an ultimately uneventful landing on the available part of the runway. None of the 55 occupants were injured.)
  • DH8D, Edmonton AB Canada, 2014 (On 6 November 2014 a DHC8-400 sustained a burst right main gear tyre during take-off, probably after running over a hard object at high speed and diverted to Edmonton. Shortly after touching down at Edmonton with 'three greens' indicated, the right main gear leg collapsed causing wing and propeller damage and minor injuries to three occupants due to the later. The Investigation concluded that after a high rotational imbalance had been created by the tyre failure, gear collapse on touchdown had been initiated by a rotational speed of the failed tyre/wheel which was similar to one of the natural frequencies of the assembly.)
  • DH8D, Hubli India, 2015 (On 8 March 2015, directional control of a Bombardier DHC 8-400 which had just completed a normal approach and landing was lost and the aircraft departed the side of the runway following the collapse of both the left main and nose landing gear assemblies. The Investigation found that after being allowed to drift to the side of the runway without corrective action, the previously airworthy aircraft had hit a non-frangible edge light and the left main gear and then the nose landing gear had collapsed with a complete loss of directional control. The aircraft had then exited the side of the runway sustaining further damage.)
  • DH8D, Kathmandu Nepal, 2018 (On 12 March 2018, a Bombardier DHC8-400 departed the side of landing runway 20 at Kathmandu after erratic visual manoeuvring which followed a mis-flown non-precision approach to the opposite runway direction and was destroyed. The Investigation concluded that the accident was a consequence of disorientation and loss of situational awareness on the part of the Captain and attributed his poor performance to his unfitness to fly due to mental instability. A history of depression which had led to his release from service as a military pilot and a subsequent period of absence from any employment as a pilot was noted.)
  • DH8D, London Gatwick UK, 2009 (On 1 November 2009, a Bombardier DHC8-400 by Flybe, made a hard landing at London Gatwick due abnormal high pitch angle and significant structural damage to the aft lower airframe resulted.)
  • DH8D, Manchester UK, 2016 (On 14 December 2016, soon after a Bombardier DHC8-400 took off from Manchester, an unfastened engine access panel detached and struck and damaged the aircraft's vertical stabiliser before falling onto and alongside the departure runway. The Investigation found the panel had been left unsecured after routine overnight maintenance which required it to be opened and that this condition had not then been detected during the pilot-performed pre-flight external check. An identical event was found to have occurred to the same aircraft a month earlier. The Operator-provided pilot training on pre departure inspections was found to be "inconsistent".)
  • DH8D, Saarbrucken Germany, 2015 (On 30 September 2015, the First Officer on an in-service airline-operated Bombardier DHC-8 400 selected the gear up without warning as the Captain was in the process of rotating the aircraft for take-off. The aircraft settled back on the runway wheels up and eventually stopped near the end of the 1,990 metre-long runway having sustained severe damage. The Investigation noted that a factor contributing to the First Officer's unintended action may have been her "reduced concentration level" but also highlighted the fact that the landing gear control design logic allowed retraction with the nose landing gear airborne.)
  • DH8D, Sault Ste. Marie ON Canada, 2013 (On 26 May 2013, a Porter Airlines DHC8-400 sustained substantial damage as a result of a mishandled night landing off a visual approach at Sault Ste. Marie which led to a 3g tail strike. The prior approach was stabilised at 500 feet but then unstabilised below that height. The handling pilot involved was a First Officer with 134 hours experience on the aircraft type, which was his first experience of multi crew transport aircraft after significant experience flying light aircraft. An absence of effective monitoring or intervention by the aircraft commander was identified during the Investigation.)
  • DH8D, Yangon Myanmar, 2019 (On 8 May 2019, a Bombardier DHC8-400 making its second approach to Yangon during a thunderstorm touched down over halfway along the runway after an unstabilised approach but then briefly became airborne again before descending very rapidly and sustaining extreme structural damage on impact before sliding off the end of the runway. The Investigation found that prior to the final rapid descent and impact, the Captain had placed the power levers into the beta range, an explicitly prohibited action unless an aircraft is on the ground. No cause for the accident other than the actions of the crew was identified.)
  • DH8D, en route, west-northwest of Dublin Ireland, 2015 (On 31 July 2015 a Bombardier DHC8-400 crew detected the presence of abnormal fumes on the flight deck and were then advised by the cabin crew that the forward toilet smoke alarm had been activated and that smoke was visible in the cabin. Smoke then appeared in the flight deck and a PAN was declared. A diversion to Dublin was subsequently made. The Investigation found that debris from a fractured bearing washer had compromised engine oil seals leading to fumes/smoke entering the aircraft through the air conditioning system. The manufacturer has since introduced a new ‘infinite life’ bearing washer.)
  • DH8D, en-route, South West Norway, 2004 (On 19 May 2004, a Bombardier DHC8-400 being operated on a scheduled passenger flight from Sandefjord to Bergen by Norwegian airline Wideroe was climbing through 13500 feet approximately 20nm west north west of Sandefjord in day VMC when there was a loud 'bang' from the left engine followed quickly by total power failure and a fire warning for that engine. The crew carried out the QRH drill, declared an emergency and made a return to Sandefjord. Although the left hand engine was shut down and both engine fire bottles had been discharged, the engine warning remained illuminated throughout the remainder of the flight. The aircraft was stopped on the runway after landing and a successful emergency evacuation of all 31 occupants was carried out with no injuries whilst the Airport Fire Service attended to the fire source.)
  • DH8D, en-route, South West of Glasgow UK, 2006 (On 10 December 2006, a DHC-8-Q400, operated by Flybe, experienced multiple flight instrument failures whilst in icing conditions at night which were consistent with icing of the pitot/static system. After descending out of icing conditions all displays returned normal functionality and the pitot/static heaters were noted to have been off and were then correctly selected.)
  • DH8D, vicinity Belfast City UK, 2018 (On 11 January 2018, a Bombardier DHC8-400 departed Belfast City with incorrectly-set Flight Director (FD) modes and the Autopilot was then engaged without either pilot noticing that the aircraft was not being flown in accordance with the FD command bar or that the aircraft had then begun to descend. The rate of descent increased unnoticed and reached 4,300 fpm before recovery from a 928 feet minimum height after EGPWS 'DON'T SINK' and 'PULL UP' annunciations. The Investigation found that no target altitude had been entered and noted failure to follow normal operating procedures including on the use of checklists.)
  • DH8D, vicinity Buffalo NY USA, 2009 (On 12 February 2009, a Bombardier DHC-8-400 on a night ILS approach to Buffalo-Niagara airport departed controlled flight and was completely destroyed by ground impact and subsequent fire. The Investigation found that the Captain had failed to effectively manage the flight and that his consequent response to a resulting stick shaker activation had been completely contrary to applicable procedures and his training, leading directly to the loss of the aircraft. The aircraft operator’s normal approach procedures were also determined to be inadequate and it was noted that prior to the accident, sterile flight deck procedures had been comprehensively ignored.)
  • DH8D, vicinity Edinburgh UK, 2008 (On 23 December 2008, a DHC8-400 being operated by Flybe on a scheduled passenger flight from Southampton to Edinburgh continued descent below its cleared altitude of 2100ft in day VMC prior to and then whilst tracking the ILS LLZ for Runway 23 at destination. It remained below the ILS GS until the ATC GND Controller, who had no formal responsibility for this phase of flight but was positioned alongside the TWR Controller, observed that aircraft had descended to within 800 ft of local terrain approximately 5 nm from the runway threshold. The flight crew appeared unaware of this when making a ‘Finals’ call to TWR at 5.5 nm and so the Controller queried the descent. The aircraft was then levelled to achieve 600ft agl at 4nm from the threshold and an uneventful landing subsequently followed.)
  • DH8D, vicinity Exeter UK, 2010 (On 11 September 2010, a DHC8-400 being operated by Flybe on a scheduled passenger flight from Bergerac France to Exeter failed to level as cleared during the approach at destination in day VMC and continued a premature descent without the awareness of either pilot due to distraction following a minor system malfunction until an EGPWS ‘PULL UP’ Hard Warning occurred following which a recovery climb was initiated. There were no abrupt manoeuvres and no injuries to any of the 53 occupants.)
  • DH8D, vicinity Kalmar Sweden, 2006 (On 6 April 2006, an incorrect response to a propeller malfunction, by the crew of an SAS Dash-8-Q400, resulted in an unstable single engine approach, and operation of the remaining engine outside limits. The aircraft landed safely at Kalmar, Sweden.)
  • DH8D, vicinity Medford OR USA, 2003 (On 8 January 2003, a DHC8-400 sustained multiple bird strikes during a night visual circuit at the Medford airport, OR, USA, resulting in loss of flight displays, multiple false system warnings and the shattering of the LH windscreen. The Captain sustained significant facial injuries and temporary incapacitation with a successful approach and landing being completed by the co-pilot.)
  • DH8D, vicinity Southampton UK, 2009 (On 3 March 2009, a DHC8-Q400 being operated by UK Regional airline Flybe on a scheduled passenger flight from Edinburgh to Southampton was making its approach at the planned destination in night IMC and moderate turbulence when the aircraft was allowed to loose airspeed to below its minimum manoeuvring speed and a momentary stick shaker activation occurred. The associated automatic disconnection of the autopilot was followed by extreme pitch up and excessive roll left before the flight crew regained full control of the aircraft.)
  • DH8D/DH8D, vicinity Toronto City Airport Canada, 2010 (On 11 May 2010, a Bombardier DHC8-400 aircraft being operated by Porter AL on a scheduled passenger flight Toronto City to Ottawa and another aircraft of the same type and operator on a scheduled passenger flight from Montreal to Toronto City came into close proximity south east of the airport and received and actioned co-ordinated TCAS RAs. Minimum separation was 300 feet vertically at the same altitude. There were no abrupt manoeuvres and none of the occupants were injured.)