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

 Actions

DHC-8 Family

From SKYbrary Wiki

Article Information
Category: Aircraft Family Aircraft Family
Content source: SKYbrary About SKYbrary
Content control: EUROCONTROL EUROCONTROL


Description

Turboprop regional airliner. Initial basic model of DHC-8 Dash 8 regional turboprop airliner family. Followed by the series 100A in 1990 with extra headroom and 100B (since 1992) with more powerful engines. From 1996 all Dash 8s delivered with a computer controlled noise and vibration supression system. Type designation with a Q for quiet.

DHC-8-402Q
DHC-8-402Q, C-GLQE, Ottawa 11 May 08, copyright uVe Ltd

Variants

Aircraft Family Members
ICAO Type Designator Name Length (m)
BOMBARDIER Dash 8 Q200 BOMBARDIER Dash 8 Q200 22.25 m
BOMBARDIER Dash 8 Q300 BOMBARDIER Dash 8 Q300 25.68 m
BOMBARDIER Dash 8 Q400 BOMBARDIER Dash 8 Q400 32.81 m
DE HAVILLAND CANADA Dash 8 Q100 DE HAVILLAND CANADA Dash 8 Q100 22.25 m

Accidents & Serious Incidents involving DHC-8 Family

  • DH8B / BN2P, Horn Island QLD Australia, 2016 (On 12 October 2016, a BN2 Islander and a Bombardier DHC8-200 were involved in a near miss after the DHC8 took off from a runway which intersected with the runway on which the BN2 was about to land. The BN2 broke off its approach just before touchdown when the DHC8 was observed accelerating towards the runway intersection on its take-off roll. The Investigation noted that the aerodrome involved relied on visual separation and use of a CTAF and found that although both aircraft were aware of each other, the DHC8 crew failed to fully utilise visual lookout.)
  • DH8B, Kangerlussuaq Greenland, 2017 (On 2 March 2017, a DHC8-200 took off from Kangerlussuaq in normal day visibility without clearance and almost immediately overflew three snow clearance vehicles on the runway. The Investigation identified a number of likely contributory factors including a one hour departure delay which the crew were keen to reduce in order to remain within their maximum allowable duty period and their inability to initially see the vehicles because of the runway down slope. No evidence of crew fatigue was found; it was noted that the vehicles involved had been in contact with TWR on a separate frequency using the local language.)
  • DH8B, en route, southwest of Windsor Locks CT USA, 2015 (On 5 June 2015, a DHC8-200 descending towards Bradley experienced an in-flight fire which originated at a windshield terminal block. Attempts to extinguish the fire were unsuccessful with the electrical power still selected to the circuit. However, the fire eventually stopped and only smoke remained. An emergency evacuation was carried out after landing. The Investigation was unable to establish the way in which the malfunction that caused the fire arose but noted the continuing occurrence of similar events on the aircraft type and five Safety Recommendations were made to Bombardier to address the continuing risk.)
  • DH8B, en-route, west northwest of Port Moresby Papua New Guinea, 2017 (On 4 August 2017, a de Havilland DHC8-200 was climbing through 20,000 feet after departing Port Moresby when a sudden loud bang occurred and the aircraft shuddered. Apart from a caution indicating an open main landing gear door, no other impediments to normal flight were detected. After a return to the point of departure, one of the main gear tyres was found to have exploded causing substantial damage to the associated engine structure and releasing debris. The Investigation concluded that tyre failure was attributable to FOD damage during an earlier landing on an inadequately maintained but approved compacted gravel runway.)
  • E145 / DH8B, Cleveland USA, 2009 (On 26 June 2009 a Bombardier DHC8-200 being operated by Commutair on a scheduled Continental Express passenger flight from Cleveland to Port Columbus was cleared for take off when an Embraer 145 being operated by Jetlink on another scheduled Continental Express passenger flight from Cleveland to Kansas City was about to cross the same runway in accordance with its ATC clearance in normal daylight visibility. The conflicting clearances were resolved by flight crew awareness and action rather than ATC intervention and once satisfied that the 145 was holding position clear of the runway, the DHC8 took off as already cleared.)
  • DH8A/DH8C, en-route, northern Canada, 2011 (On 7 February 2011 two Air Inuit DHC8s came into head-to-head conflict en route over the eastern shoreline of Hudson Bay in non radar Class ‘A airspace when one of them deviated from its cleared level towards the other which had been assigned the level 1000 feet below. The subsequent investigation found that an inappropriate FD mode had been used to maintain the assigned level of the deviating aircraft and noted deficiencies at the Operator in both TCAS pilot training and aircraft defect reporting as well as a variation in altitude alerting systems fitted to aircraft in the DHC8 fleet.)
  • DH8C / GALX, Valencia Spain, 2008 (On 11 February 2008, the crew of a DHC8-300 misjudged the sufficient clearance during taxi and collided with a Gulfstream G200 at a taxiway intersection.)
  • DH8C / P180, Ottawa ON Canada, 2013 (On 1 December 2013, a small aircraft taxing for departure at night was cleared to cross an active runway and did so as a DHC8 was taking off from the same runway. Separation was significant and there was no actual risk of collision. The Investigation found that the GND controller had issued clearance to the taxiing aircraft when he had responsibility for its whole taxi route but had neither updated the aircraft status system nor directly advised of the taxiing aircraft when passing responsibility for part of its cleared route to the TWR controller who therefore remained unaware of it.)
  • DH8C / Vehicle, Tamworth SE Australia, 2008 (On 7 February 2008, an ATC TWR at Tamworth cleared an Eastern Australia Bombardier DHC8-300 for take off having already cleared a bird scaring vehicle onto the same runway. The vehicle was still on the runway at the time of the take off clearance and as the flight crew could see the vehicle, they did not commence take off. The vehicle driver reported having been monitoring the TWR frequency and vacated the runway. The subsequent Investigation noted a record of good competency assessments for the controller involved and found no specific explanation for his lapse.)
  • DH8C, Kimberley South Africa, 2010 (On 16 July 2010, a South African Express Airways Bombardier DHC 8-300 hit an animal during a night landing at Kimberley after a passenger flight from Johannesburg. The nose landing gear took a direct hit and collapsed but after a temporary loss of directional control, the runway centreline was regained and the aircraft brought to a stop. The Investigation found wildlife access to the aerodrome was commonplace and the attempts at control inadequate.)
  • DH8C, vicinity Abu Dhabi UAE, 2012 (On 9 September 2012, the crew of a DHC8-300 climbing out of Abu Dhabi declared a PAN and returned after visual evidence of the right engine overheating were seen from the passenger cabin. The Investigation found that the observed signs of engine distress were due to hot gas exiting through the cavity left by non-replacement of one of the two sets of igniters on the engine after a pressure wash carried out overnight prior to the flight and that the left engine was similarly affected. The context for the error was identified as a dysfunctional maintenance organisation at the Operator.)
  • DH8C, vicinity Adelaide Australia, 2015 (On 24 April 2015, a Bombardier DHC8-300 making an RNAV approach at Adelaide in IMC with the AP engaged went below the procedure vertical profile. An EGPWS ‘PULL UP’ Warning was triggered at 5½nm out and the approach was discontinued reportedly due to “spurious instrument indications”. The Investigation found that the premature descent had occurred when mode re-selection after a Flight Director dropout had been incorrect with VS active instead of VNAV. It was found that both pilots had assessed the ‘PULL UP’ Warning as “spurious” and a missed approach rather than the mandated terrain avoidance procedure had been flown.)
  • DH8C, vicinity Sydney Australia, 2008 (On 26 December 2008, a DHC8-300 being operated by Eastern Australia Airlines from Moree to Sydney made an auto ILS approach in which became de-stabilised and was continued as such until a stick shaker activation occurred.)
  • 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 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 DHC-8-400 departed the side of landing Runway 20 at Kathmandu after erratic visual manoeuvring that followed a mis-flown non-precision approach to the opposite runway direction. Fifty-one of the 71 passengers and crew were killed, and the aircraft was destroyed. The investigation by the Accident Investigation Commission of Nepal concluded that the accident was a consequence of disorientation and loss of situational awareness on the part of the flight crew. Contributing factors included fatigue and signs of stress exhibited by the captain, who was the pilot flying (PF); poor crew resource management; and very steep authority gradient between the captain and first officer. The Captain’s history of depression, which led to his release from service as a military pilot was noted in the investigators’ final report.)
  • 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, 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 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.)
  • DH8A / Z42, vicinity Sault Ste. Marie ON Canada, 2014 (On 3 September 2014 in Class 'E' airspace, a light aircraft carrying out a spin recovery exercise in day VMC came very close to a DHC8 climbing out of Sault Ste. Marie. Although the DH8 crew had seen the light aircraft ahead and above and temporarily levelled off, the light aircraft then began "a rapid descending turn" and a TCAS RA 'Descend' followed. It was judged that a turn would also be necessary but even with this, the two aircraft subsequently passed within 350-450 feet at the same altitude in opposite directions. The Investigation made no Safety Recommendations.)
  • DH8A, Nuuk Greenland, 2011 (On 4 March 2011, an aircraft left the runway during a mishandled landing at Nuuk, Greenland which resulted in the collapse of the right main landing gear due to excessive 'g' loading. The landing followed an unstabilised VMC approach in challenging weather conditions. The Investigation concluded that the crew had become focussed solely on landing and that task saturation had mentally blocked any decision to go around. The aircraft commander had less than 50 hours experience on the aircraft type and had only been released from supervised line training 6 days earlier.)
  • DH8A, Ottawa Canada, 2003 (On 04 November 2003, the crew of a de Havilland DHC-8-100 which had been de/anti iced detected a pitch control restriction as rotation was attempted during take off from Ottawa and successfully rejected the take off from above V1. The Investigation concluded that the restriction was likely to have been the result of a remnant of clear ice migrating into the gap between one of the elevators and its shroud when the elevator was moved trailing edge up during control checks and observed that detection of such clear ice remnants on a critical surface wet with de-icing fluid was difficult.)
  • DH8A, Saulte Ste. Marie ON Canada, 2015 (On 24 February 2015, the crew of a Bombardier DHC8-100 continued an already unstable approach towards a landing despite losing sight of the runway as visibility deteriorated in blowing snow. The aircraft touched down approximately 140 metres before the start of the paved surface. The continued unstable approach was attributed by the Investigation to "plan continuation bias" compounded by "confirmation bias". It was also found that although the aircraft operator had had an approved SMS in place for almost six years, it had not detected that approaches made by the aircraft type involved were routinely unstable.)
  • DH8A, en-route SSE of Madang, Papua New Guinea, 2011 (On 13 October 2011, the Captain of a Bombardier DHC8-100 manually flying a low power, steep descent in an attempt to get below cloud to be able to see the destination aerodrome inadvertently allowed the speed to increase sufficiently to trigger an overspeed warning. In response, the power levers were rapidly retarded and both propellers entered the ground range and oversped. As a result, one engine was damaged beyond use and the other could not be unfeathered. A forced landing was made following which the aircraft caught fire. All three crew members but only one of the 29 passengers survived.)
  • DH8A, en-route near Sørkjosen Norway (On 21 February 2006, a Bombardier DHC8-100 being operated by Widereo Flyveselskap on a passenger flight from Tromsø to Sørkjosen experienced a temporary loss of control during descent in night IMC when the power levers were inadvertently selected to a position aft of the Flight Idle gate and propeller overspeed and engine malfunction followed. After recovery and shut down of the right engine, a return to Tromsø was made using the remaining engine without further event.)
  • DH8A, en-route, near Bristol UK, 2010 (On 24 April 2010, a Bombardier DHC8-100 operated by Olympic Airways which had, some weeks earlier, been flown to the UK for heavy maintenance at Exeter was positioning from East Midlands to Exeter in day VMC with just the two flight crew on board when it experienced a significant oil loss from one engine en route and responded by shutting it down and declaring a ‘PAN’ to ATC for radar vectors direct to destination. The remaining engine was then found to be losing oil, and the declared status was upgraded to a MAYDAY and a successful diversion to the nearest suitable airfield, Bristol, was made.)
  • DH8A, vicinity Palmerston North New Zealand, 1995 (On 9 June 1995 a de Havilland DHC-8-100 collided with terrain some 16 km east of Palmerston North aerodrome while carrying out a daytime instrument approach. The airplane departed Auckland as scheduled Ansett New Zealand flight 703 to Palmerston North airport.)
  • DH8A, vicinity Svolvær Norway, 2010 (On 2 December 2010, a DHC8-100 crew briefly lost control of their aircraft after encountering a microburst and came very close to both the sea surface and a stall when turning onto night visual final at Svolvær during an otherwise uneventful circling approach. After recovery from 83 feet agl, involving an unplanned change of control, an uneventful diversion to an alternate followed. Commencement of an investigation was delayed by failure to report the event at all initially, or fully. It was found that during loss of control, airspeed had dropped to 72 knots and rate of descent had exceeded 2,200 fpm.)
  • DH8A/DH8C, en-route, northern Canada, 2011 (On 7 February 2011 two Air Inuit DHC8s came into head-to-head conflict en route over the eastern shoreline of Hudson Bay in non radar Class ‘A airspace when one of them deviated from its cleared level towards the other which had been assigned the level 1000 feet below. The subsequent investigation found that an inappropriate FD mode had been used to maintain the assigned level of the deviating aircraft and noted deficiencies at the Operator in both TCAS pilot training and aircraft defect reporting as well as a variation in altitude alerting systems fitted to aircraft in the DHC8 fleet.)