Crossing the English Channel in a SEP [Archive]

S-Works

12th Nov 2006, 21:26

A very sound summary from FF.
The only thing I would add is given any route at least consider the options.
Depending where you are orginally coming from, Newhaven Dieppe is around 76 stat miles, where as, Lyd Boulogne Dieppe is around 86 stat miles. The first route has a large sector out of glide range of land, the second may have less than 5 or 10 minutes.
Personally I have never understood why people go SFD L2K when in the same way Lyd L2K is only a few minutes longer, however if going to the CI the trade off of time over the sea against distance is not sufficiently worth while, so go direct.

Er well because SFD L2K is only a few minutes longer...... Personally I fly direct whenever I cross water. It makes little difference, if the donk is going to quit it will go at the most inconveniant moment. The rest is risk assessment and preperation. Thinking a slightly shorter crossing will save your ass is just fooling yourself......

Fuji Abound

12th Nov 2006, 21:49

"Er well because SFD L2K is only a few minutes longer"

Exactly .. .. ..

.. .. .. but I wonder how many would have thought there was so little difference in the total distance between sfd dieppe and lyd, L2K, dieppe!

"if the donk is going to quit it will go at the most inconvenient moment."

True, but not everyone believes in Murphy I suppose.

The poster also asked about ditching.

Following a ditching the evidence is most survive the impact, but die in the water. Dont kid yourself you will survive for very little time in the channel without a raft.

robinpiper

12th Nov 2006, 22:32

Thanks for your replies.
Can I also just ask your views on this, say halfway across the engine started running roughly but did not quit totally, I climbed to get the best glide distance but in doing so busted some class A airspace.

How do you think the CAA would view this infringement?

Would London Information be the best person to make a PAN call to?

Chilli Monster

12th Nov 2006, 22:44

Can I also just ask your views on this, say halfway across the engine started running roughly but did not quit totally, I climbed to get the best glide distance but in doing so busted some class A airspace.

Squawk 7700 - the waves (if you'll excuse the pun) will part

How do you think the CAA would view this infringement?

Not unfavourably.

Would London Information be the best person to make a PAN call to?

No - Keep Box 2 on 121.5 and shout on that. The boys and girls in D&D are trained for that scenario and can do any "airspace bust" co-ordination that is required along with anything else you'll need on the surface.

dublinpilot

13th Nov 2006, 09:15

One further point.

I'd consider a rough running engine in the middle of the channel to be a mayday.

Pan=emergency but you don't require outside assistance
Mayday=emergency that requires help.

I'd want S&R deployed immediately, and hopefully get to me before the engine quit altogether. So that would be a mayday.

dp

WHBM

13th Nov 2006, 09:41

Well I clocked Dover - Cap Griz Nez at 8 minutes, which is 4 minutes each way. A quick calculation should give you your minimum height which will allow you to glide down from any point (bearing in mind that up on top of the White Cliffs at Dover is a couple of hundred feet amsl). And there you go. No busting controlled airspace; no splash.

Always seems neat to be able to see France when overhead Canterbury.

wombat13

13th Nov 2006, 10:18

(can you fly without a horizon?)

Plenty of good advice here, but none quite as valuable as the above nugget from FF.

Please make sure you have a decent level of post qualification experience before embarking on this trip (sorry, but the language of your post suggests you might not). Just because you are entitled to do something under the terms of your rating, does not mean you should launch straight into it.

I had four hours flying off the AI with an FI in the week before my first water crossing. I was grateful for every second of it as that horizon disappeared, the sky merged with the water and the view ahead was of bugger all use in maintaning straight and level flight.

The Wombat

S-Works

13th Nov 2006, 10:27

Plenty of good advice here, but none quite as valuable as the above nugget from FF.
Please make sure you have a decent level of post qualification experience before embarking on this trip (sorry, but the language of your post suggests you might not). Just because you are entitled to do something under the terms of your rating, does not mean you should launch straight into it.
I had four hours flying off the AI with an FI in the week before my first water crossing. I was grateful for every second of it as that horizon disappeared, the sky merged with the water and the view ahead was of bugger all use in maintaning straight and level flight.
The Wombat

Blimey you will be insisting on a "cross channel checkout" next.......

There is nothing difficult about flying accross the channel, I really fail to understand why people make such an issue of it.

Johnm

13th Nov 2006, 11:01

There is nothing difficult about flying accross the channel, I really fail to understand why people make such an issue of it.

I agree, but then I've done it lots of times and have IMC. For a new vanilla PPL out of sight of land on a grey day when the sky and sea are indistinguishable, it can be down right frightening:uhoh:

wombat13

13th Nov 2006, 11:08

That is a pretty cavalier response x boy.

How do you square your assertion that "There is nothing difficult about flying accross the channel" with the potential loss of an external horizon. This is the issue I highlighted. I suggest it is real for the very reason that I don't know what Robinpiper's experience is. Maybe you do know Robinpiper and are happy with his / her ability to fly IMC?

It is not only common sense, but good piloting to be current on flying off the AI before crossing water.

You really should reserve you bar-room banter for those people who know better and not spew it on people who might take what you are saying as legit.

The Wombat

S-Works

13th Nov 2006, 11:18

I agree, but then I've done it lots of times and have IMC. For a vanilla PPL out of sight of land on a grey day when the sky and sea are indistinguishable, it can be down right frightening:uhoh:

Maybe so but then it should be down to a judgement call on the part of the pilot making the flight as to whether they are current enough to deal with the conditions. On such a dark grey day then all the advice of climbinbg high is not going to be valid as they will be in cloud and even with an IMC they can't cross the FIR boundary in cloud.

There is far to much of people trying to project there own fears onto others rather than giving straight advice. Crossing the channel is no different any other flight. Plan properly, prepare and go. Wear life jackets, carry an EPIRB and go. The EPIRB is probably the best bit of kit you will buy, the mcmurdo fast find in the channel is likely to get you out of the water in under 30mins, hypothermic but alive. If it makes you feel better take a life raft as well.

Oh and suggesting that people learn to fly off the AI without proper instrument training (which is a damn sight more than a couple of hours) is even more "bar room cavalier". If the conditions require flight or possability of flight on the AI then the conditions are not VMC and the flight should not be undertaken by a basic PPL. So go "spew" your crap elsewhere.

scooter boy

13th Nov 2006, 11:53

I've done it dozens of times in several different aircraft.
Being based at Plymouth I just take the direct route and it is about 30 mins to Guernsey, 40 to Jersey in my Mooney.

Decisions as to how long an overwater leg to take depend upon characteristics of pilot and aircraft and also prevailing weather.

For a newbie PPL it really feels like a big deal and gives a tremendous sense of achievement at having made it over the water without having the hassle of ferries etc...

Good luck with your flight.

The aircraft does not know when it is over water.;)

SB

Fuji Abound

13th Nov 2006, 11:57

Bose -

I essentially agree with your last post.

However, there are occasions when whilst conditions are VMC over the land, by the time the aircraft is mid channel and has climbed high because the pilot thought this was a good idea, he is struggling to fly visually. Kid yourself not, that is often the situation so expect it and brush up on those basic instrument skills if in any doubt.

After a good day out, and in spite of the forecast, perhaps conditions are a little worse on the way back. Perhaps a recipe for unsettling some new pilots.

For that reason also, if Robinpiper is going to France for the first time, a shorter crossing may have some advantages. Firstly, if you get uncomfortable the coast is within sight before you know it and secondly there is far less time to think you are hearing the engine start to run rough.

As always though on this sort of topic, horses for courses, if you are happy with the longer crossing just get on with it.

Robin - is it your first crossing, and where are you starting from? Also let us know how you found it please - some feedback is always interesting on these threads.

wombat13

13th Nov 2006, 12:02

aluminium persuader

13th Nov 2006, 12:15

May I just point out again that Lndon FIR, fine fellows that they are HAVE NO RADAR and if you do have to ditch they will know you are going to get wet, and that's about it. Bournemouth, Southampton, Manston Wattisham, Norwich, Anglia Radar are all radar units who will be able to plot your position down to the point you go below cover & can vector other units on to you. Cover from Manston, Wattisham, Anglia & Norwich overlaps with Continental radar cover so you can be tracked all the way

:ok:

pistongone

13th Nov 2006, 12:30

Wombat,
I think you should look inwards a bit, as if you fly of the handle after just reading a post here, then what do you react like when in a high workload situation(2hrs IMC and then need to divert for some reason?)I think maturity(or growing up as you put it) would be needed to keep a level head and respond in a well calculated way! Also if you take a newby up and spend a good few hours flying on the AI, make sure you remember to tell him about fuel, radio monitoring carb ice, t's and p's and altitude!(Or FREDA for short) What i am saying is a normal instument scan, the basic "T", where you scan from the AI to DI,VSI,ASI etc. Also i thought the hours of straight and level during the PPL syslabus would have given plenty of practice of that particular skill. Add on the instrument appreciation at the end of the sylabus and off you go. I have flown on days where the horizon is no where to be seen doing a X/C over land! If your out there IO540, one advantage of learning DR might possibly be keeping straight and level on heading for long(ish) periods without an auto pilot? The only other advice i would offer to the original poster is, if the donk does quit mid channel, see if you can find a smaller type of boat to land next to(EG:-less than 200' long) as the bigger boats wouldnt be able to stop in time to pick you up. Other than that, just go and enjoy yourself and dont indulge in the local brew if your on a day trip:=

S-Works

13th Nov 2006, 13:21

So sensitive x boy to someone pointing out the obvious. And the best you can do is attack my suggestion that it is prudent to be practiced in flying off the AI before crossing water.
If you want to be a serious contributor on the forum, you really need to consider your audience when making the kind of stupid sweeping statements which has triggered my ire.
The hole just gets bigger for you. Grow up.
The Wombat

Waaaaahhhh, I'm gonna tell my mummy on you.......:p

Your suggestion that a basic PPL having a couple of hours AI practice before hacking out into IMC like conditions is the one that strikes me as less than prudent. I am perfectly comfortable with my ability to contribute to the forums, perhaps you should take a look at your own.........:E

For a first crossing then it would be prudent to pick a good day not a marginal day, but then the same goes for flying across land as well. Our flying improves by practice and building experiance. Crossing water really is a no brainer and too much is made of making it sound difficult. I would ccetainly not reccomend a basic PPL holder having a couple of hours instrument practice and heading out. A basic PPL is taught enough about flying on the clocks to hopefully survive a 180 turn and get the hell out of there. An IMC gives you the ability to make a sustained flight in the marginal conditions described.

I agree completely with you fuji, the point being in that situation the pilot should be aborting the flight not carrying on having had the suggested couple of hours of AI flight.....

unfazed

13th Nov 2006, 13:43

Just a personal observation but flying Dover Calais has a different vibe to flying Exeter - Aldernay even though both are Channel crossings.

We are well cocooned in our nice warm cosy cockpits and have a surreal feeling of well being (VFR or IMC), HOWEVER winter is a lot different to Mid July and having stood at the rear of a cross channell ferry halfway between Poole and Cherbourg in early January hostile is a very apt description of the environment. Mist and Fog, howling winds and rough seas.....couldn't help looking and thinking that if I ditch here, that wave there could well be where I end up.....aother thoughts.....Nobody is going to find me in this lot Dinghy or Not.

Could well be flying VFR on top enjoying the sun until that one engine quits

Dover Calais, nice and high, radar service, reasonable weather, lots of ships down there - much more comforting !

IO540

13th Nov 2006, 14:09

This whole debate comes down to one's attitude to risk and how to manage it. The name of the game is to always have an escape route.

I happily fly SE over water, hundreds of miles on occassions, because I carry a raft. Sure, it may be defective and may not open and then I will die, but that would presume a failure of two unconnected systems (the engine and the raft) which is very unlikely - assuming the raft has been serviced and not been lent to some flying club where somebody tampered with it to see what is inside the package...

I don't fly at night, well not on a proper dark night, because there is no escape route. You will almost certainly hit something pretty hard. My night flying is either little bits getting home in the early evening, or whatever was needed for the UK night rating, the FAA PPL and the FAA CPL. I would dread doing the FAA ATPL in a SE (even if one could) since that requires 100hrs of night x/c.

I don't fly if the 0C level is below (or anywhere near) the MSA, unless the flight has guaranteed VMC all the way.

It's funny how many people cross the Channel without a raft (at least 95%, IMHO, including most school-sponsored fly-outs) yet most are happy to do a night flight.

Curiously, flying over mountains is something most won't do, but when you are up there over the Alps at FL160 you are usually totally spoilt for landing sites. Many large elevated flat spots are covered in thick snow, which is pretty good. No chance of recovery of the airframe but anybody should be able to land there. In practice one would aim for one of the valleys.

bookworm

13th Nov 2006, 14:25

I happily fly SE over water, hundreds of miles on occassions, because I carry a raft. Sure, it may be defective and may not open and then I will die, but that would presume a failure of two unconnected systems (the engine and the raft) which is very unlikely - assuming the raft has been serviced and not been lent to some flying club where somebody tampered with it to see what is inside the package...

I don't fly at night, well not on a proper dark night, because there is no escape route. You will almost certainly hit something pretty hard. My night flying is either little bits getting home in the early evening, or whatever was needed for the UK night rating, the FAA PPL and the FAA CPL. I would dread doing the FAA ATPL in a SE (even if one could) since that requires 100hrs of night x/c.

What evidence do you have for your implicit assertions that:

* carrying a life raft increases your chance of survival to a useful level
* "You will almost certainly hit something pretty hard [in a night forced landing]"?

I would have estimated the overall probability of surviving a forced landing at night over land as higher than that of surviving a ditching at sea with a life raft on board (but without immersion suits). But I don't have statistics.

robinpiper

13th Nov 2006, 14:26

Been across on many occasions good & bad vis so the lack of a horizon is something I'm not concerned about. Usually go Lydd - Cap Griz Nez (As instructed)
Last time return leg was flown direct Dieppe-Lydd great weather so I thought why not, used GPS and LYD VOR. Great saving on the tacho too!

However I was just wondering if it would raise a few eyebrows in the clubhouse if in the future I started submitting flight plans with direct mid channel waypoint included in it.

If somebody then questioned my reason for doing this, you have all now told me that I'm not the only person out there doing it!

Thanks all for all your posts :ok:

mm_flynn

13th Nov 2006, 17:20

QDMQDMQDM

13th Nov 2006, 17:45

For wt and space reasons I don't carry a raft in the cub. I reckon chances of getting it out would be small anyway. I sometimes wear an immersion suit, but it takes up a lot of baggage space on a long European trip. I do wear a good lifejacket (Switlik helicopter Crew) and do carry a Mcmurdo Fastfind Plus GPS beacon. I also do the short crossing.

Read about it, think about it, create your own strategy to accord with your own attitude to risk and the demands of your own situation.

IO540

13th Nov 2006, 19:54

What evidence do you have for your implicit assertions that:

* carrying a life raft increases your chance of survival to a useful level
* "You will almost certainly hit something pretty hard [in a night forced landing]"?

I would have estimated the overall probability of surviving a forced landing at night over land as higher than that of surviving a ditching at sea with a life raft on board (but without immersion suits). But I don't have statistics.

Just my opinion, bookworm, plus what I see, read and hear through hanging around GA.

I may be more confident than some re the raft but then I do spend time in the sea in my other hobby and the prospect of ditching doesn't bother me at all. And I hope you would agree re my "unconnected system" comment.

I think getting good data will be very hard, because of the uneven geographical distribution of GA activity versus which parts of the population do sea crossings.

The biggest GA scene by far is in the USA. Yet, very few pilots there have a pressing need for sea crossings.

Next is Europe, where I guess UK is the biggest, Germany comparable, France #3, and who is #4? Switzerland maybe? I don't know.

We all know that few UK pilots venture abroad and those that do are mostly going to N. France. Engine failures (even counting running out of juice) are rare and ditching should be very rare, which is in fact the case, which is why we have so little data. Also S&R is quite quick around these parts, so less chance to die of hypothermia than elsewhere.

Germany has little need for water crossings. France has even less, and French GA is done mostly internally anyway; they have that sort of club scene. Central Europe has no need for water crossings.

The place which does have a pressing need for long water crossings, and where GA would have real utility value, is Greece, but I am reliably informed that the total # of GA planes there is in 3 digits, i.e. 1-2% of the UK. So, not a lot of data is going to come from there. Greece would provide useful data on raft usefulness because S&R won't be that quick over there. OTOH they have somewhat warmer waters than here...

Italy is an interesting one, but there is very little GA there too.

There is a small group of IFR pilots in Europe who do occassionally ditch but they tend to do it from quite a height so have more time to organise things. Again, the data will be slanted.

The thing I would absolutely dread is ditching in a PA28 (or any other single door plane) with an unfit or disabled passenger in the RHS. Yet, this is quite a common mode in GA outings: an elderly passenger or relative in the RHS.

A lot of ditched pilots are never found and neither is the wreckage. One can't tell what happened to them. A good chance they got out, the (not very visible) corpse bobbed about in the life jacket for a few days/weeks and then sunk. If the plane ended up in one piece, nothing will remain floating. I reckon a lot of them could have done with a raft but this could be argued both ways, since nobody knows.

Almost nobody carries an EPIRB... activations followed by missing crew would tell us they got out, but the data on this is missing because most people won't spend the £500.

As for night forced landings, I know for sure that if I just descended at Vref until it hits the ground, I am going to seriously wreck it. Any data collected here will also be slanted because GA pilots that do fly at night tend to do so on not very dark nights, where one can still see something. As I wrote, I was talking about a real dark night.

Fuji Abound

13th Nov 2006, 21:15

The average temperature of the water in the Channel in winter is 11C. At this temperature you are likely to be unconscious within 45 minutes and dead in around 2 hours, 3 hours if you are very lucky.

As previously commented, there have been a number of surveys suggesting that in around 90% of ditchings the pilot and passengers leave the aircraft successfully.

There can be little doubt the chances of surviving the initial impact on water are remarkably good. However the secret to ultimate success is avoiding hypothermia before you are rescued.

It is evident that the chances of doing so in our climate in the winter or spring are very poor unless you have the protection of a life raft. Whilst immersion suites may prove effective, their key to success is the level of insulation worn underneath - which may be poor given many would consider this creates a less than comfortable environment whilst in flight.

There are a number of AAIB reports which deals with aircraft which it would seem have “successfully” ditched but the passengers and crew died in the water.

The FAA annual reviews would suggest that of the accidents that happen at night compared with during the day you are 2 and a half times more likely to die.

However I am not aware of any statistical examination of your chances of surviving a night forced landing compared with a day. Such a study would be revealing. Leaving aside the far greater likelihood that following an engine failure pilots are less likely to maintain control of the aircraft through out the forced landing than during the day logically one would surmise the chances of severe impact damage are going to be greater.

denhamflyer

13th Nov 2006, 22:13

This may be relevant to those considering crossing if you havent already read it.

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/SRG_GAD_WEBSSL21.PDF

It seems to strongly support the idea of carrying a raft. I have spent many years skiming across the channel - and even though SAR are very good in the channel - you need to plan on 2hr+ to be rescued mid channel.

Therefore I now always carry a raft. Having said all that I have not come across any actual evidence to support the theory. AND I have not actualy practiced escaping from a plane (probably injured) and then climbing into a raft. I have done it in a boat and upside down in a car and it is not easy.

Does anyone know if such simulations exists for the non military or oil rig types?

airborne_artist

14th Nov 2006, 11:59

Fuji

You can always check the Channel water temp here (http://www.channelcoast.org/data_management/wave_charts/?table=envdata_PevenseyBay) at Pevensey.

FWIW in the RN FAA we had to wear immersion suits at water temps of 14C and below, so long there was confirmed SAR within 30 mins of ditching. I forget the temp for no SAR within 30 mins, but you can reckon it would be 16 or above.

This chart (http://www.channelcoast.org/data_management/wave_charts/index.php?disp_option=4&data_type=TSea&table=envdata_PevenseyBay&year=All%20years&data_plot=1) shows the accumulated sea temp data for the Pevensey buoy.

Note that only in July, August and September is the temp consistently 15C and above.

mad_jock

14th Nov 2006, 12:21

This is just for the persons information i haven't got anything to do with the sale.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Mini-B-300-EPIRB_W0QQitemZ190041082503QQihZ009QQcategoryZ98953QQrdZ1QQs sPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem

Seems a reasonable price. We have this type in our rib. Quite sturdy and easy to use.

I really don't think that a raft is going to be of much use to you either its going to be a complete pain in the bum to have it anywhere that you can get the thing out quickly if required.

On ebay as well there are plenty of diving Dry suits for sale at under 100 quid.
Or am sure you could rent a dry suit for a couple of days for 30 quid.

Don't go for the thin type. Go for a neoprene thick one. They turn into wet suits if they leak and still retain some bouyancy (although not much).

Personally I think the beacon is a good idea for that price but I wouldn't bother with the rest of the kit apart from the life jackets. Persoanlly the accident statistic for ditchings in UK waters and G reg aircraft, one in the last 3 years at Dundee, and one up in my old school 5 years ago ish, are good enough that its inside my not worth it zone. Single engine IMC has very similar risks if not more so but it doesn't seem to generate as much debate.

S-Works

14th Nov 2006, 12:51

MJ i agree with everything apart from the dry suit recomendation.

A neoprene dry suit is very bulky and will hamper movement in the cockpit. Flooded it gives you no more thermal insulation as neoprene works as an insulator only when water is trapped in a VERY thin layer direct against the skin. A neoprene dry bag does not work that way. One of th greatest fallacies in diving generated I suspect by Northern Diver to sell the 8mm "commercial" neoprene suits in the old days. In the older days we wore these suits with a 2mm neoprene wet suit and and pumped hot water into them from the surface via the nemo umbilical instead of air.

A membrane suit with a thinsulate under suit will keep you warm even flooded (5hrs deco in a flooded membrane bag in norway.....) and is no more bulky than normal clothes and a coat.

I wear a goretex mix boating dry bag with a weezel undersuit for long sea crossings. This is waterproof to 5m but breathes through the goretex so keeps you comfortable on the flight. I have the latex boots and wear 5mm neoprene boots over them. Very comfortable even on a very long flight.

mad_jock

14th Nov 2006, 13:29

I had a suspision you would come back with that Bose-x (who i suspect is a DIR person)

I have also had the zip go in both a membrane with thinsulate and otter compressed. I obviously would have prefered the zip to do it's job. But was warmer with the otter. I proberly don't have the same quality of suits you use and a 300 quid otter compressed does the job way better than a cheap membrane and woolybear.

Each unto there own. Anyway I wouldn't bother wearing either of them.

Whats it with this channel crossing thing?

It seems to have developed into a elite sport for pilots.

****ty horizon and fly for 30 mins in a straight line with no visual ground reference you can recognise. Sounds like every nav ex I have done in the Vale of York.

Land at an airport with the ATCO having a funny accent and not speaking the same English as you. Again this can happen at most airports in Yorkshire and Lancashire .

The most difficult navigation exercise you will have flying into L2K is working out where the prick on the push bike wants you to park.

pistongone

14th Nov 2006, 13:32

I have to do my survival ticket once every 2 years for working on the rigs. Last did it up at Teeside and it costs £500 for a four day course, not sure if you can break it up and just do the submerged escape? I will ask, if enough people are interested.

S-Works

14th Nov 2006, 13:42

I had a suspision you would come back with that Bose-x (who i suspect is a DIR person)
.

Steady on stroke.......... :) I can't be DIR I am a rebreather ITT......:p

I get my suits sponsored by OThree, 2.5mm kevlar coated compressed neoprene!

I do agree with you, there seems to be a real meal being made of an absolute no brainer trip. When i suggest it is a no brainer I get hammered for being bar room gung ho.....

mad_jock

14th Nov 2006, 14:37

Cheating buggar that is a posh thick one thats just a bit baggy (for the nappy that they all wear). And also I might add about 1.5k's worth of equipment.

Joking aside if you do go down the route of a suit make sure it has a decent hood and you have access to it.

If in the exceeding unlike event you do go in. When you combine the water temp and the wind chill on wet hair on your head if you don't have a hood on you might as well not bother with the rest of the suit.

Ps I will try a persude someone that has done the dunking course who operates fixed wing to give you thier views on if it does actually give you any training worth while. I suspect not as your hitting the water at 80mph and not as in a helicopter you land and the thing then rolls and sinks.

BrianRoth

14th Nov 2006, 15:05

Whilst completing my PPL training this summer I twice had the pleasure of flying out to France under the watchful eye of an instructor. Discussing the possibility of an engine failure he suggested that the best option for survival (after making mayday calls etc and assuming out of gliding distance of land) would be, if possible, to fly low across the path of any passing ship in order to attract the attention of its crew, and then ditch nearby.

IO540

14th Nov 2006, 15:36

There is a fairly basic problem with "drysuits" (I am using this as a generic term as there are different types) and that is that most passengers won't wear them.

It's OK if you like to fly alone, which I accept many pilots do, but that doesn't exactly make going places much fun. A lot of passengers even really dislike headsets, although the Bose X seems to be fine with everybody I have flown with.

You also have to have different sizes for passengers of different sizes.

A raft is the only way that makes sense. It is a small package, under 10kg, which lives on the back seat (in easy reach of the pilot if flying alone) and it gives you a chance. Come on, all those not carrying one... let's admit it's down to the cost ;)

mad_jock

14th Nov 2006, 17:23

A raft is the only way that makes sense. It is a small package, under 10kg, which lives on the back seat (in easy reach of the pilot if flying alone) and it gives you a chance.

nah you would be better with a 10kg yellow brick for the pool with a bit of red string stuck on it, that has "Life raft" stenciled on the side. Then the local PPL police think you have listened to them.

The reduction in heckling and abuse in the bar thus reducing the stress level before flight. Will have more of increase in safety than having a beacon, life jackets, inflatable boat, seat belt knife, dry suit, back up ICOM,backup back up ICOM with VOR thingy on it, and all that other pish they would have you carry. Its developed it an arms race of who can out safety each other. As soon as everone has the kit some pillock finds something else to up the anti.

20 quid/ crate of beer spent getting an engineer to take the cowls off, check the plugs and compressions. Would be far better money spent IMHO.

Apart of course from a GPS :p

Fuji Abound

14th Nov 2006, 17:33

"I really don't think that a raft is going to be of much use to you either its going to be a complete pain in the bum to have it anywhere that you can get the thing out quickly if required."

With that I would strongly have to disagree.

A raft offers you the best, and possibly the only chance of survival during most of the year.

I would agree a raft just might not suite all aircraft. However my raft is not much bigger than a lever box file. Crossing water it "lives" on the rear seat within easy reach of either the passenger upfront if there is one or it on to P2seat without a passenger.

In the event of an engine failure it would be on the P2 passengers lap immediately or attached to me with the layard already provided for the purpose.

I can assure you the liferaft is coming with me if and when I get out! A few trips across the atlantic in yachts, races around the Channel and in the water after diving or whilst sailing dinghies in the middle of January have taught me just what a dangerous enviroment the Channel can be - and I love water!!

To be blunt in my opinion crossing the Channel without a liferaft is just irresposible unless you are happy to gamble with the odds of having an engine failure, which I would be the first to agree are very heavily stacked in your favour. Trouble is I bet you will regret it if your number comes up when you are swimming away from the aircraft in a three foot swell, dusk is descending and you were wishing for a change you were up there instead of down here :) .

mad_jock

14th Nov 2006, 18:10

The problem I have with any bits of floating kit is it can not be reallied apon to be in the right place at the right time. Or even if its tied down you can use it when required. So if its not on you before you takeoff you might as well not have it at all. Which is why all the offshore suits now have to be worn zipped up and each have a personal beacon attached. And you even have to have the hoods up for takeoff and landing.

And the fact that you have the landyard attached so to speak. Are you really sure you want the possibility of the thing inflating before you get out? And I know the attachment lanyard doesn't fire it. It doesn't need someone to pull the thing. The strap could catch and pull on anything with the g-forces involved with a ditching it could easily deploy inside.

Most of the people debating the pro's and cons of life rafts haven't had the experence of actually using one. I did years ago the old RGIT course which part of which is them trying to make you sick taking you out of Aberdeen harbour and fannying about in rafts.

Even in the most modest of swells the north sea can throw at you and water temps of 11degs which is tropical for the east coast. Most people failed miserably to get into a 20 man life raft which is stable in comparsion to the ones for planes and have alot more foot holds and other aids to aid boarding. On our raft it was only because myself and another diver managed to lever ourselves onboard then bounced recovered the others that anyone got on board. And that was in noddy suits with out the shock of your bollocks getting emersed in 11 degree water. Which we all know has the the ability to stop you breathing never mind anything else.

Now the whole industry has been made to realise that these life rafts are next to useless and they all have to install the escape boats.

With zero training, no noddy suit the yellow brick wins hands down because at least you can use it as a chock when you land at the other end.

Fuji Abound

14th Nov 2006, 19:55

"Most people failed miserably to get into a 20 man life raft which is stable in comparsion to the ones for planes and have alot more foot holds and other aids to aid boarding."

It is not going to be easy. However a common misconception is that aircraft go straight to the bottom. On the basis of the evidence this is a fallacy, even in quite high seas.

There is one of those all too often repeated sayings in yachting - "only get into the liferaft if you have to step up into it from the sinking yacht". It has some relevance though in that with any luck you will be stepping off the wing into the raft, not trying to climb into it out of the sea.

I dont pretend a raft is a panacea - but it does give you a better survival chance than anything else, with dry suits close behind albeit not favoured by many on grounds of comfort and needing a suit for every passenger.

airborne_artist

14th Nov 2006, 20:02

Take my tip. Get a life raft that's capable of holding one more than you have total persons. I spent 18 hours in a liferaft for for six, with five others. Despite being properly dressed we froze (it was February) and if one of us had to move to improve circulation, we all had to move. One was so cold he couldn't pee, despite being very desperate to go.

It was OK though, as we got rescued when the wind blew up to a six. The rescue boat was swamped as we reached the jetty, so we had to swim/jump for it.

Lucky it was just an aircrew survival course in Poole Harbour :E

Then we were dropped in the New Forest with no food for another five days, but that's another story.

IO540

14th Nov 2006, 20:12

MJ

I could pretend ignorance and ask whether you are just winding everybody up, but I suspect you are being serious.

Which is really counterproductive in this case. As Fuji says, without a raft you are stuffed. The default outcome will be death. For you and your passengers, plus any children who will die a lot quicker than you (unless they are the increasingly common super-obese British kids, some of whom - thanks to their parents feeding them rubbish - don't need a liferaft).

Unless you get lucky and ditch next to a vessel, whose captain is awake. Most commercial shipping runs on GPS-driven autopilots so this is not guaranteed.

You've got to remember that the plane will sink, within a few minutes. Unless it is a pressurised type, and you close the door behind you :) it will virtually always be gone by the time any conventional S&R arrives. So, of the cases where nobody was rescued, nobody knows whether they hit the water at -10,000fpm in a spiral dive or whether they ditched and got out fine and then died. On non-AOC piston GA flights, the wreckage tends to be left down there. Quite a thought!

Whereas with a raft you have a chance. The default position is that you will get in and survive. OK, it may be duff, or it may be mishandled and lost, etc. But the chance is that it will open just fine. I gather that the chance of a regularly serviced raft failing is about 1-2%.

As for the operating cord, you need to pull out about 4-5ft before it triggers it, and that is fine for attaching the loop to e.g. the yoke nearest the exit door, and then pulling it out, with the raft already wholly outside the plane. This is a matter of knowing this, and also briefing pasengers on it (in case the pilot is incapacitated).

There are gotchas with rafts.

Some d1ckhead might activate it inside the plane, despite having been told by the pilot that that will be certain death for all. That's why I keep a knife, stowed away in a very accessible place (to puncture it).

Also some are too heavy for a lot of people to lift; the well marketed RFD raft (Transair, etc) is no doubt of very good quality (all RFD stuff is very good) but it is too heavy for smaller people to move about. I had one on loan and could only just move it on/off the back seat. I carry a U.S. one from Survival Products, from Harry M.

One needs one with a canopy, but they cost a bit more.

It needs to be looked at, every couple of years say, and this is about £200 at SEMS, Basildon.

You have to say NO when some flying club asks to borrow it for their next fly-out to LTQ, because if it comes back even remotely looking like somebody has a look inside, it has to go back for an overhaul; another £200. But then would you lend your parachute to somebody you don't know, to chuck in and out of the back of a PA28?

scooter boy

14th Nov 2006, 20:48

Funnily enough when I arrived at the last Helitech at Duxford in my R44 I recognised the chappie who landed next to me as Steve Brookes - a very nice guy and survivor of an Antarctic ditching and subsequently first piston chopper pilot to reach the South Pole (along with Q Smith). On the minibus from heli parking to the show I quizzed him about his near death experience bobbing around in the freezing drink:ooh: .
The chopper had no floats and I don't know whether they had a raft but they didn't get into one - they were wearing survival suits though (which saved their lives).
The suits were not zipped up with hoods up etc...(they didn't have time as they were wearing headsets and autoratated into the drink pretty quickly).
Apparently it took 6 months before they could feel their extremities - not because of frostbite but slow insidious cooling of the tissues esp nerves.

Scary stuff :uhoh: - I don't think many people get the reprieve they did when a heroic Chilean pilot spotted them in poor wx and directed a boat in to collect them.

I never cross La manche sans dingy - always in the back seat within easy reach. EPIRB, backup VHF radio in waterproof bag and flare gun also packed together.

I should also wear a lifejacket for the crossing but rarely do anymore such is my faith in Mr Continental however if kids are aboard I always set a good example and put one on.

As for a survival suit - I own a reconditioned one and used to wear it going across to Jersey in my little kitplane - laziness and apathy have set in though and the 1 hr crossing has become 40 mins - it now graces a dusty peg in my hangar.

Just think how much of a prat you would feel if the engine quit half way across and the raft was in the hangar - DOH!

SB

S-Works

14th Nov 2006, 20:59

Despite my faith in the donkey when flying the Cessna I have often contemplated a raft. Flying Perpignan to Majorca in the 172 direct airways with no life raft did make me think more than once about buying one, even made me think about putting the life jacket on!

Any suggestions on a good raft?

IO540

14th Nov 2006, 21:19

The one I have is about 2nd one down this page

http://gps.co.uk/cgi-bin/weblistpage.pl?liferafts

Except I paid at least £1200 for it, in 2003 ;) Prices have come way down. Soon it will cost less than a bose-x headset....

It's compact and very movable; a 6 year old can move it.

mad_jock

14th Nov 2006, 21:23

I have and I am sure Bose-x has been soaking wet, submerged on an off for a couple of hours at a time for upwards of 12 hours in one day in water temps down to 4 degs and wind chills down to - 10deg. And after 12 hours straight down the pub stinking of baby talc and sweaty arm pits, although as he is a tecky boy he proberly use KY jelly :p . There have been cases of divers lost at night for 18+ hours in suits. And the only casulty being the boat driver who left them out there after greeting them on the pad when they got back, broken nose I think.

You are kidding yourself if you think that a raft gives you anywhere near the same protection as a suit. What about matey boy down in the south sea capsizing, 4 days. Your not going to tell me he would have survived that in a pair jeans t-shirt and a fleece in a raft. Jeans t-shirt and a fleece in a suit he did submerged.

Without protection in a raft unless you are dry you will be lucky to get 2 hours without being dead. You actually when wet cool down faster on the surface with the air/wind evaporating the water off you than you do when submerged. It's more about keeping the layer of clothing next to your skin dry or wind free than anything else.

A EPIRB especially if switched on when the problems occur, coupled to a Mayday on 121.5 will have the helicopter turning before you have touched the water. They will have a straight line intercept for your position. The coastguard can DF you. Before you have even touched the water channel 16 will be.

"All stations, all stations, Mayday Mayday Mayday in progress, aircraft ditching lat.... long.... report any sightings. Dover ferry xxx turn port 30 degrees report."

All the british Ferrys for P&O are half payed for in grants off the goverment and have war roles. They have to responed to and have to do training for emergency rescues. And all boats in British waters have to respond to a call an emergency on channel 16 and they had better have a very good reason to refuse to help.

Just tell D&D what your going to do ie straight ahead or circle down in your present position. In the channel you are not going to be more than 30mins after splash before there a boat or a chopper plucking you out of the drink.

And if a plane stays afloat long enough for you to step into the raft with the aircrat sinking behind you. You will more than likely not need the raft at all. The fuel tanks with the fuel being lighter than water provide the bouyancy not the cabin. So if your in a low wing you can sit on the roof. If you in a high wing you are doing the swim and escape thing which means you are more than likely going to loose the raft and are already 20mins into the dead thing. The kids in the back are dead anyway.
Its the fact that D&D know your precise postion which saves you not that you are in raft.

edited to add.

I really do think Life rafts are pish compared to suits and the inflatable type which are now being phased out now because they are pish in marine circles are the worst. Unless you have a suit on your dead anyway and there isn't much time difference between in raft and out in british waters. And for cross channel stuff totally inadequate for what people report them to save you from. Kids are Knackard anyway because of there surface area to volume ratio. Why do you think its a legal requirement for all off shore crews to wear emersion suits and carry beacons. When they train you they virtually tell you your not going have a raft and to link arms and stay together.

I really don't think you will have a chance in hell getting out of cold water into a raft unless you have any training / experence operating in the sea. I struggled like hell with 800 dives under my belt most of which involved grabbing boats in various levels of sea with twin tanks and a couple of ponys hung of the side.

The only thing rafts do is keep people together for recovery when they are in suits and extend your exposure. Without suits they only stop the bodies floating off if you get into them in the first place.

And IO I can garantee without doing the life raft course you will flip that wendy house before the first person has got in. If you do ever have to use it anger you need people on the oppersite side to that which the first person is boarding. And I presume it doesn't have handles on the backside which poeple with hyperthermia can actually hold in thier hands. The proper ones have foot grips so you can stand on them so the whole thing doesn't go over.

Fuji Abound

14th Nov 2006, 22:42

"I really do think Life rafts are pish compared"

Yes, but you are not considering the likely circumstances.

The facts:

Most pilots will not wear suitable clothing underneath a dry suit. Why? It is uncomfortable and they are not aware of the importance of doing so.

Most pilots will leave their dry suit unzipped. Why? It is comfortable. They are not aware that they may struggle or forget to do it up in a ditching and they are not aware how serious the consequence of not doing it up are.

Most pilots, even if they have a dry suit for their personal use, are unlikely to have suits for their passengers given the range of sizes potentially needed and the cost.

So, whilst I do not dispute dry suits used properly may provide as good a survival tool, realistically few pilots are likely to buy enough for them and their passengers or use them properly.

Life rafts

Most pilots are aware that life rafts can be bought or hired.

More pilots are aware that they are no longer bulky and are large enough for them and all their passengers.

Few life rafts are sold without a canopy.

Life rafts are therefore a convenient alternative but do they increase your chances of survival?

The facts:

Hypothermia we agree is the biggest risk. Air temperature, being wet and most importantly wind chill contribute to hypothermia. Once in a canopied life raft, radiant heat from the occupants, protection from wind chill from the canopy, the ability to remove water with sponges provided, and with any luck an air temperature that is warmer than the sea combined with the benefit of some solar radiation all contribute to reducing the onset of hypothermia compared to being in the water (with or without a dry suit). Hopefully you will also find there are foil blankets provided.

Moreover, you now have a platform to keep the group together, to support those that cant swim or who are poor swimmers and from which to operate any other rescue equipment you may have (epirbs, flares etc).

Compare that scenario with a pilot in the water who forgot to do up his dry suit, and is wearing a t-shirt and jeans underneath, cant swim very well and is scared of being in the water, a couple of passengers with him who are only wearing life jackets (the pilot didn’t have any extra dry suits), trying to stay together and operate the flares and epirb they some how managed to hang on to which are now underneath the water in a rather cold hand!

In short there is no perfect solution. There is no guarantee you will get out of the aircraft with the liferaft, or get in it when you have got out. However I submit a raft provides most pilots with the best and practically most realistic way of improving their survival chances in a ditching (short of course of the yellow brick afore referred).

mad_jock

14th Nov 2006, 22:54

Yes I am considering the circumstances. The perfect solution is to wear a suit, if you decide the risk is unacceptable. Why bother getting a solution to a very remote problem which isn't going completly solve the problem in the first place and actually works out more expensive in the long run with a few trips than getting the solution which completely solves the problem.

As far as I can see you can hire a raft for ? 120 quid? for the weekend. Which might if you get all the planets together, the right people on board, the sea in the right state, the right ditching conditions, the aircraft has a low wing. Or you hire suits for the weekend which scary enough costs the same 120 quid fully does the job you don't have to worry about all the things which are going to cock you up with the raft, and you are up to 12 hours plus survivial time in sub 5 deg water for 4 suits for hire.

Buying a raft costs at least 900 quid for the wendy house option which you must admit is pish and totally useless in british waters for anything over a sea state 2, for which you could buy over 9 suits off ebay which will allow you to survive in hurricane conditions. Bitch to store I will admit.

My whole point is you might as well not bother at all. The only thing which is going to really do anything for your survival is a beacon.

All i wear under my dry suit is a pair of pants and a t-shirt. I am sure they will have more than that on. If you ever get a wooly bear you will never get your wife out of the thing in the house. Its like a giant adult baby grow made out of fleece, zero chance on getting your hands on her bits.

Its not the zip that annoys its the neck seal. A silcone seal solves the problem.

the point I making is that a raft doesn't solve the problem you are trying to solve in British waters. Yes in the crib or FL etc but not here.

Anyone want to buy a yellow brick? 1 pound extra for a thick tape to tie onto your mother in law.

A few links to prove a point that you are fecked if you get wet without a suit

http://www.tc.gc.ca/marinesafety/TP/Tp13822/chapter-3.htm

And

http://www.tc.gc.ca/marinesafety/TP/Tp13822/chapter-1.htm

The graph is quite interesting half way down. It states that at 10deg water temp you go from 1 hour to death in clothes to 12+ hours wearing a suit.

You will also note as well the cold swim shock stuff. And the difference between dry shod life raft entry and wet. And to be honest your going to be wet in UK waters even if you get in dry with a 4 man wendy house.

I really hope though we can agree that the marine transport dept for canada know what they are talking about when it comes to getting cold.

In summary, from 1945 until 1995 a great deal of scientific, industrial, training and legislative effort has been put into the prevention of hypothermia. As a result, in both Europe and North America, particularly Canada, there are very good survival suit regulations

My reading of the report is that life rafts are pish and suits work why bother with something that doesn't work?

Andy_RR

15th Nov 2006, 03:27

reading this thread, I can't help feeling that all the energy spent sorting out what to do in the event of ditching wouldn't be better spent in making sure you don't ever have to ditch. I realise that we are juggling probabilities, but if I spent time taking my 1-in-10 chance of survival to 1-in-100, wouldn't it be better to spend the effort making your 1-in-100 000 risk of ditching to 1-in-1 000 000? Prevention being better than cure.

I noticed that someone posted earlier that 1/3 of ditchings are caused by fuel problems of some sort. I worry not knowing what causes the other 2/3rds. Any clues?

I'll admit I have never piloted a water crossing, but I would have thought a pre-crossing checklist and ultra-conservatism in decision making would easily give you an order of magnitude improvement in risk.

Do people who fly water crossings plan a decision point where everything has to be green (excluding the passengers!) before one continues?

I would imagine it would be preferable to fly a certain distance overland prior to the water crossing too? i.e. departing Shoreham or Lydd after refuelling and heading straight out over the briney doesn't seem like a bright idea to me. If you have half an hour airbourne over land to be sure that you have no oil temp problems, no fuel leaks, etc. it must be a good insurance policy?

What does 'good airmanship' dictate in terms of planning?

A

PS: I have ambitions to PPL my way to France as soon as I can! :)

shortstripper

15th Nov 2006, 06:04

I'm afraid I agree with MJ ... mind you Andy_RR has probably made the most pertinant post.

I used to work as a proffessional fisherman and shudder now to think of those times that I pee'd over the back in the dark of night, alone whilst the crew were drinking tea below deck. No lifejacket (impractical most of the time for commercial fishing) high seas, often out of the transport lanes .... :eek:

We did survival courses and I can tell you that getting into a liferaft even under controlled circustances back then as a fit 20 something was not at all easy. Having just survived a ditching, being older, worring about passengers, ect ect would almost make it impossible. It's not of course, but the odds are stacked against you! :sad: It's interesting to note that in the Fastnet disaster, most of the casualties had abandoned their yachts for the ill percieved safety of flimsy little liferafts. Yes, liferafts are ok if you have room and enough spare weight. However, some sort of survival suit would be far more practical. Even wearing a wet suit would be better than nothing (might cause some second looks as you de-frock at L2K though :p ). We once picked up some drift divers who's support boat had suffered engine failure. They'd been in the water several hours in the early spring, and whilst cold, were not too the worst for it.

The sea like the air is not to be taken lightly, but again it all comes down to personal levels of acceptable risk. Who does the full bit when flying to Sandown? The risk is still there, but few bother as the hope for a quick pick up increases that acceptable risk (mind you in winter, the chances are still not brilliant even in the Solent).

SS

wombat13

15th Nov 2006, 10:09

I do agree with you, there seems to be a real meal being made of an absolute no brainer trip. When i suggest it is a no brainer I get hammered for being bar room gung ho.....

Bose-x, I kicked your arse because you poured scorn on what many in GA consider prudent for crossing water. :ok:

S-Works

15th Nov 2006, 10:17

Bose-x, I kicked your arse because you poured scorn on what many in GA consider prudent for crossing water. :ok:

I poured scorn on making a mountain out of a molehill and you made me out to be gung ho. I suspect I have one or two more water crossings in light GA aircraft than the average Private flyer. I know what works and what does not. After 20yrs of teaching diving ranging from working for the British Antarctic Survey, rigs off scotland to fat yanks in Jamaica I also have a pretty good understanding of exposure protection and what works. I am also used to making life or death risk assessment in very inhostpitable enviornments. I tend think that takes me a very long way from being "gung-ho".

How many trips have you done over water in light GA aircraft Wombat?

wombat13

15th Nov 2006, 10:47

Bose-x, that is all very interesting stuff, but..........

I don't belong to the camp that suggests flying to France is very different to any other flight. Nor do I belong to the camp that believes the engine knows it is over water. Nor do I belong to the camp that believes you should have a life raft strapped to the wing.

All I believe is that it is prudent to be up to scratch on flying off the AI before embarking on on a VMC water crossing - because it can be different to VMC over land.

As for your request for me to get into a pissing competition with you on experience, you really are asking the wrong person. :=

The Wombat

S-Works

15th Nov 2006, 11:05

Bose-x, that is all very interesting stuff, but..........
I don't belong to the camp that suggests flying to France is very different to any other flight. Nor do I belong to the camp that believes the engine knows it is over water. Nor do I belong to the camp that believes you should have a life raft strapped to the wing.
All I believe is that it is prudent to be up to scratch on flying off the AI before embarking on on a VMC water crossing - because it can be different to VMC over land.
As for your request for me to get into a pissing competition with you on experience, you really are asking the wrong person. :=
The Wombat

No pissing competition just a straight question. I want to know what experiance you base your assertions on thats all. If your ego is big/small enough to want to consider it a pissing competition then its your call.

Fuji Abound

15th Nov 2006, 11:48

"After 20yrs of teaching diving ranging from working for the British Antarctic Survey, rigs off scotland to fat yanks in Jamaica I also have a pretty good understanding of exposure protection and what works. I am also used to making life or death risk assessment in very inhostpitable enviornments."

I just had to say that it reminded me of that lovely bit in the film Cool Runnings where Sanka is says he knows a bit about push carts coming from six wins in the island derby and the coach tells him he has competed in 8 Olympics and won 6 gold metals (or watever).

In the same way as Sanka reading your background it automatically may me think:

THATS IS A HELL OF A PLACE TO BE COMING FROM :) !

S-Works

15th Nov 2006, 11:58

"After 20yrs of teaching diving ranging from working for the British Antarctic Survey, rigs off scotland to fat yanks in Jamaica I also have a pretty good understanding of exposure protection and what works. I am also used to making life or death risk assessment in very inhostpitable enviornments."
I just had to say that it reminded me of that lovely bit in the film Cool Runnings where Sanka is says he knows a bit about push carts coming from six wins in the island derby and the coach tells him he has competed in 8 Olympics and won 6 gold metals (or watever).
In the same way as Sanka reading your background it automatically may me think:
THATS IS A HELL OF A PLACE TO BE COMING FROM :) !

I spent 6 months being very cold and wishing I had not taken the job with BAS!!!

mad_jock

15th Nov 2006, 13:25

Andy your thinking is sound. Although India to France is a different league to a channel crossing :P

A wee PM to one of the D&D chaps on this board or phone them to organise you and a packet of choc biscuits to visit them. And you will have done about 50% more planning than most.

They will tell you exactly which route will give you optimum SAR cover and also what information and where to put it to maximise your recovery options in the unlikely event the need should arise.They will also be able to give you the benefit of all the common cockups which occur and they have to deal with.

To be honest if it wasn't so far away I would come along to.

And apparenty if you go and speak to your local RNLI station they are more than happy to give you free safety advice. You never know they may let you be a training aid for the day. And if you do speak to them and it turns out I have been talking poo. Post it on here for the benefit of all.

ChampChump

15th Nov 2006, 15:02

All the british Ferrys for P&O are half payed for in grants off the goverment and have war roles. They have to responed to and have to do training for emergency rescues. And all boats in British waters have to respond to a call an emergency on channel 16 and they had better have a very good reason to refuse to help.

It's good to see the lie sometimes seen in the flying comics debunked here. (I've seen it written that if you have choice, ditching near a ferry is not recommended as they have schedules to keep).
Working on one of the above, I have first hand experience of the maritime efforts made when anything even remotely suspected to be a MOB or equivalent is reported. A passenger thinks he has seen an orange lifejacketed blob in the water: the whole circus reacts immediately.
As non-swimming proof of the efficacy of a life jacket, I'll take anything that I can get into the aeroplane, which amounts to not a lot. Flying in company with another aircraft helps too, even if it has absolutely no effect on the engine/visibility/skill level.
Flying incurs some risk. So does everything else. Pilots possibly perform more risk assessment than most and having done so, should go and have fun.

robinpiper

15th Nov 2006, 17:27

Can I ask any Cirrus pilots out there if faced with a engine failure mid channel would they pull the CAPS handle?

I'm sure I read somewhere that a US pilot received serious back injuries from a water ditching using the parachute due to no cushioning from the undercarriage.

Just enquiring as someday I may get the pleasure to fly a Cirrus across the channel. The escape handle would seem all to tempting to me but would a standard ditching be a better option?

Dude~

15th Nov 2006, 20:52

For what its worth, I recently made a fairly long sea crossing in a light single in Scotland. I was concerned enough about it to research survival times in the sea which was about 10C at the time. I ended up wearing an immersion suit (only a basic one like the oil rig workers wear on the big choppers) over ski trousers, and lots of upper layers, woolly jumper, fleece etc. Then I wore a woolly hat, wetsuit gloves (poor cabin heat anyway!), boots over the suit, then an 121.5 beacon thingy strapped to my upper arm, another one in a leg pocket, and a couple of marsbars and a knife.

I spent about 45 minutes over water in total. This kit certainly made me feel a lot less at risk, even if it was only perceived.

On the other hand, I ended up flying IFR over an overcast layer above mountains for a short while, which in hindsight would have been by far the worst place to have engine trouble, but I had put so much thought into the wet bit I didn't think about the hilly bit.

Someone mentioned turning up at L2K in a wetsuit, well I did that once, and although I know the wetsuit would have given me a much better chance of survival, I wouldn't recommend it because you get so dammed sweaty in them, its really not comfy, in fact far worse than the immersion suit.:)

PS. I did once cross the channel without any lifejackets/kit but maybe that's why I'm more careful now days!

Chuck Ellsworth

15th Nov 2006, 21:16

Here is some more food for thought on risk management and risk exposure.

I will not fly single engine over water beyond gliding distance of land.

However we do fly these things across oceans.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e353/ChuckEllsworth/RotterdamBridge.jpg

For the first six to eight hours we are flying two single engine airplanes at the same time as an engine failure means ditching due to being to heavy with fuel to stay airborne.

On the plus side we have an excellent chance of sucessfully landing and staying afloat in almost any sea state, and of course we fly with full imersion suits and two life rafts.

But the risk is there and must be analyzed carefully for each flight.

Chuck E.

RVFlyer

16th Nov 2006, 11:57

All this noise about how safe it is to cross the channel is a little tedious, can we keep this succinct?

0) Plan thoroughly & take someone whos been before
1) Check that the aircraft is 100%
2) Check that the weather is 100%
3) Try to avoid Spring time as the water is coldest then.
4) Wear lifejackets or immersion suits
5) Remember to turn round if the vis. becomes bad
6) Be clear about the procedures for exiting a ditched aircraft
7) Take the shortest over water route
8) Go as high as possible (>4500ft)
9) Bring back some trophee duty free

A danger to consider is being hit by a boat if you do go in the drink.

A final anecdote, a group of microlight guys crossed the channel except for one who had to ditch & another who circled over him until the rescue chopper picked him up, they reckon he would not have been found had the other guy not stuck around to relay radio calls etc.

Go for it.

turniphead

16th Nov 2006, 13:15

It would be interesting to find out how many of our SEP's that we worry so much about over short water crossings actually arrived in the UK by ferry flight over the ocean. Most of those Ferry pilots make many hundreds of SEP crossings (frequently written out in Pilot Mag) and the engine failure rate is just about ZERO. Most who perish on the journey fall foul of fuel problems or weather problems.
Therefore with a life jacket and proper planning a water crossing is very safe.
Safer than IMC over mountains (or even over a major fog bank) or worse still both at night.

Fuji Abound

16th Nov 2006, 13:43

"Therefore with a life jacket and proper planning a water crossing is very safe.
Safer than IMC over mountains (or even over a major fog bank) or worse still both at night."

I think I know what you mean but the engine no more knows it is over fog, mountains or water.

The risk of engine failure in any situation is fortunately very small.

The survivability of water without protection from the cold (and a lifejacket most certainly does not count) or from impacting whatever you might impact in mountains or over fog is debatable.

Personally I think I would take mountains, fog then water unless I knew for sure someone would pull be out the water within three hours (if I was only wearing a life jacket) - and most of the year I wouldnt make it that long I suspect.

"--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All this noise about how safe it is to cross the channel is a little tedious, can we keep this succinct?"

Blindingly and obvious all seem to come to mind at the same time - we were having a debate about the pros and cons of life rafts and immersion suits. We know the chances of a ditching are very remote and we know there are other precautions you can take - it just so happened we were debating one particular aspect - thread drift yes, but that is how these threads sometimes go.

mad_jock

16th Nov 2006, 14:29

Mind you all this about exposure in water.

Getting stuck in the hills overnight without suitable protection will kill you just as fast as an hour in the water. So dude~ you might have been kitted out by accident alot better than most for a trip over the hills IMC or VMC

The beacons work on the hill, your suit was wind proof and water proof, hat, neoprene gloves, couple of mars bars and a knife to fight off the haggis and the local women. Having survived the forced landing not a bad position to be in.

I am sure that the list of kit the Alaskan's and Candians take with them would be very interesting and proberly includes a big gun.

There is a lovely covering of snow on the Highlands just now.

scooter boy

16th Nov 2006, 21:02

[quote=mad_jock;2969482]Mind you all this about exposure in water.

I am sure that the list of kit the Alaskan's and Candians take with them would be very interesting and proberly includes a big gun.

quote]

MJ, Is Candia where candy comes from? Like Mars Bars? ;)

Just wondering, SB

Dude~

16th Nov 2006, 21:44

Jock wrote,
So dude~ you might have been kitted out by accident alot better than most for a trip over the hills IMC or VMC

Ah yes I hadn't thought of it like that!

Fuji Abound wrote:

Personally I think I would take mountains, fog then water unless I knew for sure someone would pull be out the water within three hours (if I was only wearing a life jacket) - and most of the year I wouldnt make it that long I suspect.

Fuji, are you sure you'd rather mountains before sea? An IMC glide below MSA is very likely going to make you a CFIT statistic before you know it. Give me the sea anyday, as long it's not overcast down to the deck!

(Obviously if its VMC I'd rather take dry land, depending on exact terrain)

chuns

21st Nov 2006, 15:02

...or at least “a” view.

Hello, everybody. Your moderator suggested I might have a look at this thread, in case there was anything I could contribute.

Firstly, reading your postings really took me back as I actually learnt to fly as a BOAC cadet at the College of Air Training in Hamble in1968!

Naturally our experience is based on the accumulated knowledge of the rescues carried out by our lifeboat crews, and a vast amount of experience from a team of Sea Safety specialists. A lot of what we say concerns survival (after avoiding them) from a boating incidents, which doesn't normally involve any catastrophic impact, such as a plane ditching, however many of the issues could have a parallel relevant to this thread. We only attend a few aircraft incidents.

There are three issues, I think.
o Self-help and preservation
o Calling for help
o Surviving long enough to be rescued
…and a fourth (I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition) –
o Being confident of being rescued

Much of what has gone on before about lifejackets and liferafts is relevant. You tend not to drown if you're wearing a lifejacket, though there is such a thing as secondary drowning, of which more later. We advise boaters to always wear a lifejacket, as you never know when you might find yourself in the water, though I guess that is impractical for a pilot. Certainly a lifejacket will keep you afloat long enough to be rescued. However in any kind of choppy sea secondary drowning is an issue, as the body naturally takes a position in the water which is face to the oncoming waves. A spray hood attached to the lifejacket would stop the the waves inhibiting breathing. Many of you will be aware of the ‘Ouzo’ tragedy off the Isle of Wight - the casualties were wearing lifejackets and were floating on the surface, but had drowned.

A liferaft is a practical solution, and the poster who reiterated the advice about stepping up into your liferaft is correct. You do, of course, need to be able to access it and launch it. Remember to tie the life raft to the ‘plane, otherwise it will drift away before you board. Cut the line with a knife once aboard.

With the communications equipment in aircraft, I don't suppose they will be any doubt about your location. A Mayday call is appropriate, as there is grave and imminent danger. We advise boaters to carry flares, not just as a means of communicating distress, but also to indicate their position to the SAR assets. Boaters often carry a small beacon called a PLB, which operates within the GMDSS framework, and transmits a position automatically to the Coastguard.

The survival issue is the one to be aware of. In the summer, survival time in the English Channel, for example, is astonishingly short. One can slip into 50% consciousness within an hour. Heat loss is the killer, and if protective clothing is not worn, death comes quickly. Body heat is lost 26 times faster in water than in air. Again it is probably impractical to contemplate the appropriate garments, however at the very least the pilot and passengers could adopt what is known as the HELP (Heat Escape Lessening Posture) position, which effectively limits the amount of body surface area exposed to the heat sink that is sea. Basically this involves bringing your knees up to your chest, and hugging them, like curling up into a ball.

Be confident of being rescued. As long as you have initiated a Mayday there will be serious search and rescue activity going on on your behalf. RNLI all-weather lifeboats are capable of 25 knots, so our ability to get to you quickly is on your side. The Dover boat would be with you in under an hour, even if you were just off Bleriot-Plage!

Ladies and gentlemen, I hope the foregoing has been helpful in your debate, I shall keep checking into the forum for the next day or two in case there are any questions I might answer, or elaborate on any points.

By the way, the key advice we give to boaters is not to get in the water in the first place. I guess that applies to pilots too.

Best regards, stay safe.

Peter Chennell
RNLI Sea Safety Manager

BRL

22nd Nov 2006, 12:46

Many thanks for your response Peter. :)

Fuji Abound

22nd Nov 2006, 14:42

Yes, thanks for your response.

There may be a few comments that may be of interest to you as I appreciate you deal with yachts more than planes!

"though I guess that is impractical for a pilot."

Not so. the standard recommendation is for the crew and passengers to wear life jackets. The key is NOT to inflate them until you have left the aircraft as they can prevent you getting out.

"With the communications equipment in aircraft, I don't suppose they will be any doubt about your location"

Not necessarily so. All the aircraft comms are likely to fail the in the water. In the panic a pilot may not give out an accurate position and unfortunately many aircraft still do not carry a GPS which makes it impossible for them to give an accurate position.

"A liferaft is a practical solution"

The unresolved debate on this thread is whether you were better of with a liferaft or immersion / dry suit, and how practical each was as an airborn solution.

If you want to stir the pot you could give the RNLI's views! :) :)

Miraz

23rd Nov 2006, 01:44

a few more cheap, light things for the kit bag that don't seem to have cropped up earlier in the thread. I am new to flying, but have lots of time at sea in small boats..

A small bag of powdered dye - chandlers should be able to sell you some bright green stuff that is purpose made for the job. A 150ft long bright green stain on the water with you at one end of it makes you much easier to locate.

A decent waterproof strobe light - get one with a length of line attached to it, so that you can hang it down a few feet into the water. If someone is looking for you at night then a big patch of flashing water is much easier to spot than someone waving a torch or a little strobe in the air.

Bright coloured swimming cap - sounds daft, but they do a really good job of helping with heat loss through the head, even under the hood of an immersion suit - get a bright one with fluorescent patches on it that will show up well at night.

A and C

23rd Nov 2006, 08:43

Over water flights do have a risk but this can be reduced and managed by some simple precautions, there are two major issues :- staying alive in the water & being located by the rescue services.

As has been said above the water is cold with life expectancy of one hour in the summer and only 10 Min in the winter.
Life jackets must be worn at all times when over the water there is simply not enough room to put them on when the engine stops.
A liferaft is also a must as said above this must be attached to the aircraft when deployed I have a seat belt attachment on my liferaft so the seat belt is released to enable escape from the aircraft I attach the liferaft to the seatbelt, this has the advantage that no sharp items are needed to launch the liferaft and release from the aircraft is easy.
Once in the liferaft half the problems with the cold are over and the problem of being located are about to start.

When ever I fly across the water Box 2 is tuned to 121.5 if things go wrong it is then a quick call MADAY to the ATC unit that I am working and then off to 121.5 D&D have the kit to locate you quickly and can get the rescue assets launched. Next tune your GPS to the page that gives the nearest VOR and broadcast the radial and distance as you are decending with repeated reports as you are about to hit the water, For security reasons most airliners are now listening to 121.5 so a very accrate ditching location will be receved by a number of aircraft.

You should have an ELT once in the liferaft switch this on and wait when you hear the helicopter deploy your sea marker dye and flairs, flairs are good for attracting boats but sea markers are on limmited use for location by boats.

If you are flying and you hear a ditching in progress near you try to get to the location and see if you can locate the ditched aircraft (if they have broadcast a radial & distance then you can put this into the GPS as a used waypiont and go to the location, an aircraft overhead will help the peope in the water, just knowing that help is on its way is a great moral booster and you will help the reacue services quickly locate the people in the water. once the rescur helicopter is visual with the people in the water go away, your job is done and the helicopter crew don't need disturbance on the radio when winching the people out of the water.

chuns

24th Nov 2006, 09:08

Glad to help. Always like a bit of pot-stirring, but in this instance I'll try to be dispassionately practical!!
...............................................
"though I guess that is impractical for a pilot."

Not so. the standard recommendation is for the crew and passengers to wear life jackets. The key is NOT to inflate them until you have left the aircraft as they can prevent you getting out.

Good news, and good advice.
....................................................
"With the communications equipment in aircraft, I don't suppose they will be any doubt about your location"

Not necessarily so. All the aircraft comms are likely to fail the in the water. In the panic a pilot may not give out an accurate position and unfortunately many aircraft still do not carry a GPS which makes it impossible for them to give an accurate position.

The issue here, then, is to get found quickly. The PLB (personal locator beacon) is the best bet, though at £400 if you don't buy a GPS you are not likely to buy one of these. The advice from Miraz is good.
...............................................
"A liferaft is a practical solution"

The unresolved debate on this thread is whether you were better of with a liferaft or immersion / dry suit, and how practical each was as an airborn solution.

If you want to stir the pot you could give the RNLI's views! :) :)[/quote]

Even with a dayglo hood, searching vessels have a difficult job finding something the size of a melon in anything other than flat seas. Remember although the sea looks flat from above, it is quite textured, and small objects are visible only from time to time in any kind of a chop. Remember also, objects in the water get taken away from point of entry. We and the coastguard have clever computers that calculate the search pattern given time of incident, weather conditions, and type and drift charactaristics of the casualty. Enhanced visibility is what you should aim for, and any SAR pilot or cox'n will tell you they would rather be searching for a large orange liferaft than a small orange head. From the survival point of view it is a no-brainer, though I accept there are other considerations for a pilot. If nothing else orange smoke float flares are a good idea.

Peter

Fuji Abound

24th Nov 2006, 09:59

chuns

24th Nov 2006, 11:03

"From the survival point of view it is a no-brainer, though I accept there are other considerations for a pilot."

Are you saying it is a no-brainer to carry a liferaft, or wear an immersion suit in terms of survivability as opposed to chances of being spotted?

From a SAR aspect, and in the channel, the chances of finding a person is greater (= quicker) if we (or the helos) are looking for a liferaft. The time will be measured in single digit hours if there is a reasonable position, in a very short time indeed if a PLB is activated. Even in the depths of winter survivability is high, though as in so many things, "it depends". With no position, it is a totally different story, though a hi-spec raft will allow survival for days.

You may survive for ever in a suit, but not be found, though smokes and flares could help.

It has to be down to personal choice after evaluation of the risks, and practical considerations. Help us to help you as much as you can. We want to be able to find you quickly, and find you alive.

Having been on exercises both in a suit, and in a raft, in 'orrible conditions, the confidence drains very quickly when you are small, and all alone and low in the water. However, in a raft, with all the survival aids in the pack (a SOLAS 'A' pack has water, energy food, torch, flares, seasickness tablets etc etc, and, crucially, thermal protective aids (TPAs) which are like large polythene bags, but with good thermal insulating properties) you can be warm(er), and have means of signalling your position. So you will not die of exposure, and have a greater chance of being found.

My choice would be to go for the liferaft, every time.

turniphead

24th Nov 2006, 14:24

IO540

24th Nov 2006, 14:34

Raft for me every time for reasons given by "chuns" .

Plus most "non-GA-type" passengers are absolutely not going to wear suits, and if you make them, they won't fly with you another time.

Plus for the cost of several suits you can buy a very nice raft.

denhamflyer

24th Nov 2006, 14:44

My choice would be to go for the liferaft, every time.

As an ex-boater I used to carry two very high spec 8 man liferafts, and to be honest typically only I and 1 or two others were strong enough to man handle them about.

For aircraft weight is very very important so we tend to use very simple liferafts - what in your opinion is the minimum liferaft items you think we should have to survive in the channel. ( also at what distance(time) from SAR do you think a survival suit should be worn if at all)

PS. This disussion has been about very short crossings but it is also not unusual to go direct(ish) out to the channel islands/cherbourg and potentially further afield across to holland and denmark.

IO540

24th Nov 2006, 15:17

I carry a 4-person raft from Survival Products (USA). It is light enough for somebody not too strong to lift it. As you say, the big ones are heavy, and in fact some 4-person ones are IMHO too heavy too.

Equipment is IMHO optional. One can buy rafts with a kit of bits like tablets for sickness. Making a mayday call and setting 7700 ought to be enough in most of Europe. I have an emergency bag containing an ICOM radio, a handheld GPS, a 121.50/243/406MHz EPIRB, and some other bits like guaranteed fresh batteries (replace them annually), and would hope that either myself or somebody else can carry that into the raft.

Recently I have been looking at some new American radios, which are immersible, as well as very compact. They are not CAA approved so not for sale in the UK but I will try a covert import via a friend in the USA who will re-package it for me. It should be easy to call up an airliner on 121.50.

chuns

24th Nov 2006, 15:18

Re : 1 hour to Bleriot-Plage...
Where is the line of demarcation between English and French rescue services? FIR Boundary for aircraft or mid channel or what?
Does RNLI have views on efficiency of French services and what is the degree of co-operation and co-ordination between the two countries (especially when a broadcast MAYDAY on 121.5 is made?)
Dreadful thought if both French and UK services intercept the mayday call and then dither about who is going to respond!!

There is a line roughly down the centre of the channel, clearly visible on Google Earth. Surprised you haven't seen it from your cockpit!

In fact there is strong, close, intimate and effective co-operation with the French (and Dutch) with us helping them, and them helping us. For example we sent a boat near to Calais when their asset was on another job. The French also task the Channel Island lifeboats. It is about saving lives, after all. Similarly the two coastguards for the most part put aside national boundaries.

As to efficiency, the RNLI is the best in the world in every respect (not many British things you can say that about, especially Cricket Teams). Everybody else comes second. No particular views about the French :oh:

You might also be interested to know that we sell our de-commissioned lifeboats to third, and not-so-third world countries, where they continue to save lives, even though some are pretty long in the tooth.

RatherBeFlying

24th Nov 2006, 15:22

Highly informative:ok:

http://www.equipped.com/ditchtoc.htm

chuns

24th Nov 2006, 16:10

[quote=denhamflyer;2984003]
For aircraft weight is very very important so we tend to use very simple liferafts - what in your opinion is the minimum liferaft items you think we should have to survive in the channel. ( also at what distance(time) from SAR do you think a survival suit should be worn if at all)
quote]

First question is relatively easy - flares, torch, 1st aid, water, energy food, seasickness tablets, TPAs for each on board, bailer, sponge, sick bag (each), radar reflector, maybe repair kit, sea anchor. That is my recommendation, but more is better. I guess you don't need fishing kits, etc.

Second one is harder, as SAR is not a point in geography, though, of course it has to start somewhere. You could say you need survival gear the minute you cross the coast, though that is a bit extreme. As you might have gathered, I think a liferaft with TPAs is the ideal solution.

If, for whatever reason, you prefer to equip yourself with a survival suit, your life expectancy is a direct function of the water temperature, and how long you take to get found. We die of lack of water before lack of food.

I think the issue is this... you are making contingency plans for an eventuality that is unlikely, but possible. If your mitigation of that risk is a survival suit, then wear it when you think your survival time is less than the time it might take the SAR assets to get to you. If we say, for example, that you will survive (and keep afloat, remember) for three hours in the Channel in late summer without protection, then when we get to you you may not be very well, but you'll be alive.

Five hours might be different. You might have a heart attack. You might die of cold water shock.

Between Devon and Brittany there is an awful lot more water, so our likehood of finding you will run into days, maybe. Depends on our fix, what the viz and sea is like etc etc. It is unlikely that 48 hours will pass before you are Found

Not sure about the type of survival suit you mean. If it is convenient to wear when flying, then wear it. If you have the notion that, on ditching, you'll amble out onto the wing and put it on, then get a life raft.

There are no hard and fast rules on this, and it has given me plenty to think about, but sadly a lot has to be left to the individual in the absence of definitive research.

Does that help?

denhamflyer

24th Nov 2006, 16:26

thanks chuns it does help.

So my reading of this is in order of preference:-

1. Life Raft

2. PLB / EPIRB

3. Survival suit.

The list you give is quite extensive - e.g radar reflector. I would be interested in your comments on a typical Light Aircraft liferaft and its bits. Remember we typically have a small door with which to espace and carry the life raft thru.

(see http://www.survivalproductsinc.com/fourman.htm)

I think you have convinced me to buy a PLB for my longer trips!

DaveW

24th Nov 2006, 21:53

Sounds reasonable, except:

0 = Lifejacket.

You have to make it into the liferaft in the first place.

Edited because mad jock's subsequent post reminded me I'd forgotten something: Thanks, Peter, for the RNLI perspective - very interesting and thought provoking.

mad_jock

24th Nov 2006, 22:26

I stand corrected. Hadn't thought of the spotting thing. I had put my faith in the EPIRB giving my position.

The suits are like the inshore crews gear and should be put on before departure.

Peter thankyou for taking the time to reply to the thread. Its actually quite nice (even if I was wrong) to have an authoritative opinion to answer a debate. We have John Farley and a few other undisputed holders of knowledge who can conclude debates. You have just been added to the list.

As a matter of interest is it recorded how many ditchings have occured in UK waters?.

P.S is someone going to take Peter for a flight?

IO540

25th Nov 2006, 08:12

DaveW

The lifejacket won't affect getting into the raft. If you are in the water, and the raft isn't tied to the aircraft, you probably aren't going to make it into the raft, especially if you are wearing a life jacket.

Any significant wind is going to blow an empty raft along the surface faster than any sub olympic class swimmer can go after it.

The objective is to attach the cord to the aircraft (e.g. the yoke), then with the raft package outside the aircraft, pull the cord out until the raft starts to inflate, then get into the raft while its cord is still attached to the aircraft.

The cord has a breakable link in it which supposedly prevents the sinking aircraft dragging the raft down (but I carry a knife for this purpose anyway).

If you chuck the raft into the water, hoping to climb into it, it will just float away. Unless there is zero wind, which is rare.

Fuji Abound

25th Nov 2006, 08:17

"P.S is someone going to take Peter for a flight?"

If you would like to go for a flight (free of course) Peter, PM me and let me know where you live. If I am near, I would be delighted to take you if you would like to - two engines or one as you prefer.

DaveW

25th Nov 2006, 09:17

DaveW
The lifejacket won't affect getting into the raft. If you are in the water, and the raft isn't tied to the aircraft, you probably aren't going to make it into the raft, especially if you are wearing a life jacket.

I completely agree with having a painter line to attach the raft to the aircraft until you've got into it. However, I must take issue with some of the rest of your post.

A lifejacket certainly can increase your chances of getting into the raft. If you have to enter the water first before boarding the raft - rather than stepping into it from the wing, which is the ideal but not always possible - then you want a lifejacket.

Maybe you will decide not to inflate it until you have caught the raft, but you really want the jacket in case things don't go to plan.

1. It's amazing how quickly you can get exhausted in the water. Throw in the cold and some shock, and it'll happen that much quicker.

2. What if the liferaft doesn't inflate? Or only partially?

3. What if the liferaft is the other side of the aircraft to you? (e.g. your pax took it out with him)

4. What if your pax needs some help?

5. What if the aircraft was inverted on ditching? Getting the raft out will be even more of a challenge, and you certainly won't be stepping into it from the wing then.

6 etc. - other scenarios are available!

You (and your pax) want a lifejacket and a raft.

Now, I am not claiming to be an expert on this, but I have been fortunate to have done several aviation sea survival courses and renewals, both wet and dry, which have absolutely convinced me of the above.

On one of them, from Calshot, the raft only partially inflated due to a faulty valve. If I hadn't had a jacket (and it had been for real, of course!) I'd have been dead. As it was, the exercise crew left me be whilst I clambered into the floppy raft and inflated it manually to a sufficient extent to have some bouyancy itself. I was shattered by the end, and that was in late summer, whilst wearing an immersion suit, in the Solent.

Speaking of immersion suits - whilst it is the case as mentioned earlier that you will cool down 20+ times faster in water than in air, don't forget that you may well be soaked through if you don't have an immersion suit and therefore that 20+ 'advantage' will actually be a lot lower once you are sat sodden in your raft.

An immersion suit doesn't keep you warm; the layers of clothing under it are what keeps you warm - the suit keeps them dry.

The choice of whether to wear a suit or not is less clear cut on a short Channel crossing, and really comes down to your attitude to risk - but as ever, one needs to undertand those risks in order to make an informed judgement. You may consider that a 406MHz ELT will bring SAR to you quickly enough that you will not need a suit, but without one I bet you'll be c-c-c-cold, whatever the time of year.

If I was wearing a suit, it wouldn't be with the intention of using it instead of a raft for the reasons Peter gives earlier. Of the two, a raft would always be the first thing I went for.

Final comments on rafts - get one with a canopy. You want the wind off you if you are wet (and even if you aren't). Also, stream the sea anchor as soon as you get in; you wouldn't want the wind to invert the raft with you in it...

denhamflyer

25th Nov 2006, 10:25

I agree with wearing a lifejacket and I always do. ( I somewhat assumed that as read, assumption is the mother of...)

However I also agree that I would NOT normally inflate it unless I had to.

I had a number of experiences with "automatic" jackets in the marine environment - it is particularly difficult to climb on board a rib/liferaft on your own with a jacket fully inflated (as I am sure you are aware).

The issue with being cold is to do with the thermal properties of the sea. Once out of the sea, whilst you will be cold and wet you will no longer be loosing your body heat trying to warm up the sea! So you still have the significant advantage.

PS. I also carry the survival product liferaft - but am somewhat nervous of its efficacy - having spent many years carrying robust deep ocean certified liferafts!

IO540

25th Nov 2006, 12:00

DaveW

No disagreement there :ok: I wear a life jacket too.

The question mark is whether one can swim a short distance (e.g. to a raft) faster with one or without one, and how well one can swim with one inflated.

I read a report a while ago, of people who ditched wearing the standard jackets. For some reason they decided to swim. This may have been just localised movement, to keep themselves oriented face-away from breaking waves (perhaps a significant sea state, F6 or more). After swimming half an hour, all were bleeding substantially from cuts in the neck area, caused by the jackets.

All "pilot" jackets will do this, as far as I know. They are not designed for serious wearing. Once inflated, you are supposed to keep still. These come from the usual pilot shops, usually made by Remploy Ltd to various external fabric specs but with identical internal content. The cheapest (£50) are awful, with fabric which makes you sweat like a pig.

There are proper jackets with padding in the right places, and designed for continuous wear by professional crew. These start at about £250. One name I recall is Switlik, made in USA. I tried to buy one of these a while ago but the UK agent was completely uninterested in selling me one.

Obviously if somebody can't swim at all then they will swim better with an inflated jacket than without a jacket :) Myself, an OK swimmer, I am not so sure. I would wear the jacket but would not inflate it unless I was stuffed (no chance of getting into a raft) and just had to float. But then I must admit I have never tried swimming with one on, inflated or not.

This is all hypothetical for most of us, and let's hope it remains so, but it's a good discussion.

soay

25th Nov 2006, 14:21

One name I recall is Switlik, made in USA. I tried to buy one of these a while ago but the UK agent was completely uninterested in selling me one.
I had exactly the same experience, so I bought a Parmaris GA-1. Unfortunately, it is horribly uncomfortable to wear in the cockpit, because the flap that goes over your shoulders forces the top of your back away from the seat, causing you to hunch forward. If the Switlik (http://www.switlik.com/lifevests.html) vests are more comfortable and anybody knows how to get one in the UK, please post here.

London Mil

25th Nov 2006, 14:47

Just a thought. The last RAF crash we had in the sea was a Tornado at Holbeach range a few weeks back (OK, it wasn't quite in the sea as they ended up on the mud flats). Considering that everyone knew the location of the aircrew, there were more PLBs going off than I've had hot dinners and there were three helicopters dispatched to the scene (one of which was actually rotors turning at the time), you may be interested to note that Peter the Pilot and his WSO bag carrier were left pondering life, the universe and everything else for 45 minutes before the were joined by the ever heroic helicopter crews.

IMHO that, unless you are extremely lucky, you should plan on being in the water for at least an hour and probably two.

IO540

25th Nov 2006, 16:08

If the Switlik (http://www.switlik.com/lifevests.html) vests are more comfortable and anybody knows how to get one in the UK, please post here.

It's easy to organise a purchase in the USA (using a US based contact) and surface shipping to the UK. Not sure about air freight due to the air bottles, and courier (DHL etc) is a waste of money for anything over say 10kg. If there was enough interest I would be happy to do a bulk purchase via my distributor in NY. Bypassing UK sole agents is always fun ;)

However, I would first make sure that we can get them serviced here, e.g. by SEMS in Basildon.

IMHO that, unless you are extremely lucky, you should plan on being in the water for at least an hour and probably two.

I think, looking at where you will be coming from, at least that long. That's why a raft is so essential.

Rod1

25th Nov 2006, 17:50

Having been watching this thread for some time I think it must be putting the fear of god into all who have not flown the short crossing before.

The Channel is the busiest shipping lane in the world, and most of us only fly across it in summer. In my aircraft I am out of gliding range of land for 90 seconds. The chances of your engine failing during this time are extremely remote. Calculate yours, plus your point of no return, based on the weather for that day.

I always play spot the boat. On a typical Saturday in summer you will probably be within gliding range of several yachts and you have a 30% chance of a warship. Any of these, plus numerous other options will have you on board in no time. This is by far your best survival chance.

Most aircraft float, at least for a while. There is a case of a DR400 which floated for over 2 hours (admittedly it had dry tanks). This aircraft was towed to shore and eventually flew again (I considered buying it 10 years later). Assuming you make a good job of getting the aircraft onto the water you may even have time to get out of a PA28, but I would not like to try it, personally.

Life Rafts
Based on a one week advanced open water survival course I did in the water around Jersey many years ago you had better hope the aircraft floats. None of the untrained fit young 20 something’s, which had not been previously trained, could get into the raft in moderately good conditions. That is a failure rate of 70 out of 70 (about 5 of us had done it before and we all made it, but we were all ideally dressed. This test was carried out in open water, in summer. Based on this the chances of your average PPL getting into a raft in open water must be very very low. I would guess my chances, wearing a lifejacket in place of a buoyancy aid, and with no wet suit, to be <50%.

In my youth I have flown for 1.5 hours across the North Sea and done the long crossing many times. I now only fly the short crossing, but I consider this to be very low risk, primarily because of the very short time you are out of gliding range and I do not fly it in winter.

I always hold a ditching brief before take off, as if your crew do not know what to do then you are in big trouble, particularly in a four or six seater.

Rod1

Fuji Abound

25th Nov 2006, 18:44

"In my aircraft I am out of gliding range of land for 90 seconds."

A very efficient aircraft flying the shortest route then.

A typical PA28 will manage 1.75 nm per 1,000 feet, flown perfectly.

The shortest crossing possible is around 26 nm, so I suspect if you do the maths and fly at 3,000 feet you are out of glide range for rather longer. :)

"you had better hope the aircraft floats."

"Most aircraft float,"

Ah well, that's settled then. :confused:

Rod1

25th Nov 2006, 19:14

Fuji

As every schoolboy knows the English Channel is 21 sm wide at its narrowest point, this is 18 nm. I have just checked this on the map and it is bang on and there is no restrictions on this route. If you are out by this much with your planning ……

At 130kn that is about 8.5 min from coast to coast. I know my maths is right so it is up to each pilot to do the sums and allow for wind for the point of no return and calculate the amount of time out of gliding range. I do not fly a PA28 so I have no idea how it will relate, and there are many versions.

Most aircraft, correctly ditched, will float, but not all, so yes I do hope mine is one of them.

Rod1

Fuji Abound

25th Nov 2006, 19:32

"As every schoolboy knows the English Channel is 21 sm wide at its narrowest point,"

Correct!

I was fixated by the usual LYD Cap Gris Nez that most do:{ .

Mind you it is still not 90 seconds in a PA28 at 3,000 feet :), and PA28s glide well.

Rod1

25th Nov 2006, 20:26

I have no idea what the fig is for whatever PA28 you fly but it is not hard to work out. I think my old DR400 was about 105 seconds, which is still insignificant if you have planed you PONR and know which way to turn without wasting too much time.

Consider flying Dover VOR to ING NDB, it could reduce your risk window by a considerable %, you have a nav aid at each end and less chance of banging into anyone. Your route would put me out of gliding range for about 314 sec, which is a huge increase on 90.

The safest way to cross is one where you do not end up in the water at all. The PONR calc and the how long calc are well worth the effort. It is also an excellent way to understand the minimal risk the short crossing represents in most aircraft. I did the calculation for a Nipper once, and stayed at home!

Rod1

Fuji Abound

25th Nov 2006, 20:55

"I have no idea what the fig is for whatever PA28 you fly"

I dont - fly a PA28 that is, but so many do it, it seemed a good example.

However, I agree the risk on any short crossing is so small that if you worried about it I suspect you would never fly over water.

However, the discussion about exposure may make some think about longer crossings - I know I do.

3FallinFlyer

26th Nov 2006, 09:55

I think every overwater trip deserves it's own appraisal on what survival gear to take bearing in mind comfort and practicality against risk. Main factors to consider are type of A/C, POB, distance of crossing, time off year, sea state / weather conditions (vis etc) on DOF.

Personally in the arrow, I would just take a raft and PLB on channel crossings etc up to 75nm overwater in the summer on a fine day with pob's. But the same crossing in the winter or in bad weather where we may not be found for much longer survival suits would be a good idea. If I was crossing the North Sea by myself direct from Newcastle to Texel in the winter/spring I would definately have a raft, survival suit and PLB/ELT as a minimum.

767bill

26th Nov 2006, 10:12

First I must say that I am not well qualified to post on this thread - am still to go further over water than the Thames Estuary. That said I would consider ditching in water as a real last option and don't warm to the idea in the slightest. I would certainly put out a Mayday straight away if the engine failed.
As for planning the route and altitude I would pay really close attention to wind speed and direction so that I knew with as much accuracy as possible gliding distance in any one direction to a possible dry landing spot, trying to remember that the wind decreases (generally) as you get lower. That said if there was a very strong headwind that might warrant a lower altitude.

chuns

27th Nov 2006, 09:02

thanks chuns it does help.

The list you give is quite extensive - e.g radar reflector. I would be interested in your comments on a typical Light Aircraft liferaft and its bits. Remember we typically have a small door with which to espace and carry the life raft thru.

(see http://www.survivalproductsinc.com/fourman.htm)

I absolutely understand the constraints of weight and volume/bulk. I also acknowledge that at some point the cost and impracticality will have to be offered up against the probabilty of an incident over water. The list I gave is a good stab at ensuring survival, though there are no hard and fast rules that I have been able to find since I became involved here. Under those circumstances the responsibilty, and the decision about equipment, has to rest with the skipper/pilot.

If you were not to carry everything I suggested, it does not mean that you won't survive, it is just that you are making certain. How many of us have said "I wish I'd....etc" because we'd decided not do something that we came to realise we needed to have done?

Remember the two criteria - 1. Survive. 2. Be found. Enhance the liklihood of both.

I had a look at the raft you indicated. The words "unapproved" jumped off the page at me, but equally it may not meet some technical standard that is irrelevant. I would say anything is better than nothing, it certainly is small and light.

You mention in your priority list a survival suit at #3. If we are still considering the Channel, and your raft has TPAs, you don't really need one.

And to all of the posters on this forum - what a nice bunch of people you are, a pleasure to engage with, and to debate a serious topic. If ever I can help in any other way, do contact me - I am easily found at the RNLI.

I also had a couple of offers to join members on a flight - thank you, I'd love to be able do that.

All the best

Peter

chuns

27th Nov 2006, 09:30

As a matter of interest is it recorded how many ditchings have occured in UK waters?.

I am sure it is, possibly the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, but I don't have that info readily to hand.

What I can tell you is that on average, over the last 10 years we record launches to 24 incidents around the UK, Channel Isles, and Ireland per year. When you strip out "stood by" where we launch in case a situation develops, and "others coped" where the situation resolves itself, we are left with 11 launches a year.

I was very surprised how high that number is.

Peter

mad_jock

27th Nov 2006, 11:33

That is alot higher than I expected :sad:

Squawk 2650

27th Nov 2006, 11:36

I ALWAYS take a knife, if the life raft inflates accidentally while it’s still in the A/C you could be in serious trouble. I’ve often flown the VFR route from IOW to Cherbourg. Seriously recommend having an IMC rating even on the CAVOK days it can be very disorientating .

S
:cool:

LowNSlow

27th Nov 2006, 11:51

chuns firstly, thanks for taking your time to bring an a hands on lifesaving perspective to this thread. Secondly, is the annual average of 24 launches for all causes or only aviation related incidents?

mad_jock

27th Nov 2006, 20:21

I would presume aviation only as Shetland can do that in a fortnight.

www.rnli.co.uk

They have a rather nice map showing whats working. I haven't yet looked at it without scotland being red.

Crash one

28th Nov 2006, 00:48

Nice one Jock, had a look at the map. relevant question, how many times have you looked at it & seen the channel bit red? Seems like it is safer to cross the Channel than the Forth estuary.

mad_jock

28th Nov 2006, 09:54

I havent noticed to be honest

But I would imagine that its quite seasonal the south coast busy during the summer months and the north during winter

RatherBeFlying

28th Nov 2006, 11:31

A common theme in ditching stories is difficulties getting the raft out, secured to the a/c or a body, inflated and boarded. Getting into the raft does not always happen:uhoh:

In selecting a raft, you do want to know what it's like to board in open water -- some are much better than others.

It might help to practice the evacuation and raft deployment on the ramp without inflation so that everybody understands who does what when. Perhaps if the raft is due for servicing, you may want to take the opportunity to inflate it and even have a swim. Check with the servicer on what's needed to repack it.

Thermal protection gives you a longer time of capability for the effort required to get into the raft and vastly improves your chances if you don't.

PLB, strobe, signal mirror, smoke flares all belong on your person.

So do I have this kit when I make my favorite water crossing from the Bruce Peninsula to Manitoulin Island? Nope -- I just fly it at 9500' and am always within gliding distance to shore:ok: