crossing the channel

[rans6andrew]

I have in the back of my mind some restriction about time/distance from land while crossing the channel and the carriage of transponders or PLBs.

I think it is "no more than 10 minutes from land if you don't have a transponder".

Can someone confirm or correct me? The aircraft is a three axis microlight so it is legal without a transponder on both sides of the water.

Ta,

Rans6.......

[hoodie]

m. Berger, there's no 10nm offshore requirement for a Flight Plan (although file one if you wish). The trigger for needing one is when crossing an International FIR boundary.

You're correct about no UK requirements for transponder or PLB/ELT when crossing the Channel. The French don't require a transponder, and microlights don't need to carry PLB/ELT.

[patowalker]

The carriage of an ELT was required if flying
(bb)at a distance of more than 10 minutes flying time at normal cruising speed away from land suitable for making an emergency landing


Microlights were granted an exception to use PLBs, instead of ELTs, but now all non-commercial flights are exempt.

http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/ORS4_902.pdf

Microlights are not required to carry an ELT or PLB in France either.
https://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/dossier%5Caicfrancea%5CAIC_A_2008_10_EN.pdf

[Jan Olieslagers]

Microlights are not required to carry an ELT or PLB in France either.

but I understand they do be required to in Austria, and it must be the 406 variant too.
Not that it matters in the present subject.

[rans6andrew]

thanks to all who responded.

I knew there was something but I didn't remember it being exempted. As it happens I have a 406 PLB which I will be carrying.

Unless the winds are worse than the forecast we won't be going via Austria, we are heading through France to Northern Spain.

Rans6...

[peterh337]

There is no requirement for this but anybody crossing the Channel should carry a raft.

A PLB won't do you much good unless, possibly, you have an immersion suit and are happy to be bobbing up and down, for possibly many hours, with your head sticking out of the water, and your arm holding the PLB.

You can now get life rafts down to 7-10kg - Survival Products, from e.g. Harry M (http://www.gps.co.uk/Life-Rafts/Survival-Life-Raft-4-6-person/p-99-607/). I always fly with one of these.

[patowalker]

7-10 kgs is too heavy and probably too bulky for a microlight two up. A drysuit, a PLB and a short crossing have to do. The closest SAR helicopter for the Dover/Cap Gris Nez crossing is at Le Touquet, so don't delay getting on to Lille.
Les hlicoptres de la MARINE NATIONALE (http://sauvmer.free.fr/helico/helicomarine.html)

[Jan Olieslagers]

Peter, I am sure this has been discussed over and again but it's a subject I have not yet come to terms with. I'd much love to cross the channel one day - I visited Headcorn driving and it seems a very likeable place! - and many more there must surely be! - but the security discussion leaves me unsure.

Crossing from Cap Gris Nez to Dover, remaining below controlled airspace with my humble microlight, how many minutes will I be needing a raft as plan B, i.e. be unable to glide to the closest beach? Is this short while worth the hassle , the cost, and the extra weight?

And if do carry such a raft in said humble microlight, high-winged, what are the chances for myself and a possible passenger to get the raft out and upside up and inflated and ourselves transferred to it before the ship flounders? Small chance, if any, I should reckon, though periodically repeated training might help.

Until I get this sorted, my long trips will rather be to the East and/or South.

[peterh337]

7-10 kgs is too heavy and probably too bulky for a microlight two up

I would think the weight of the extra fuel burnt flying all the way to the piece of UK coastline nearest to France, and the same on the French side, is way more than 7kg?

[patowalker]

I would think the weight of the extra fuel burnt flying all the way to the piece of UK coastline nearest to France, and the same on the French side, is way more than 7kg?

Yes, but most microlights will be limited to about 15kg baggage and most of those flying to France are not just going to L2K for lunch, so they are usually up to that limit with clothes, camping gear, spares, oil and tools. Then when you get to the other side, there is little space left for the drysuits and lifevests. I have yet to see a microlight equipped with a raft.

It's a whole different world, Peter,. You should hitch a ride one day and enjoy some real flying. :)

[BackPacker]

And that's apart from the challenge of actually deploying the raft, and getting into it.

In a low wing aircraft you stand a reasonable chance of landing upright and having some time to deploy the raft, then enter the raft from the cockpit or from the wings. If you're (very) lucky you might not even have to get wet.

A weight-shift microlight fuselage has no buoyancy to speak of, and will probably submerge up to the wing almost instantaneously. The wing itself might offer some buoyancy, but by that time you are certainly wet, and probably struggling to get out of the aircraft yourself anyway. Taking the raft with you in those conditions is going to be an incredible challenge.

Bobbing up and down might be uncomfortable but will not kill you. Hypothermia will, and the best protection against that is to avoid getting wet in the first place. So in a weightshift microlight, my number one choice would be to get a decent drysuit/survival suit plus a suitable life vest. Secondary items would be the PLB and something called a RescueStreamer. Or a smoke canister. Or something else that makes you very conspicuous, so the time to locate you is minimized.

[peterh337]

most microlights will be limited to about 15kg baggage

I often read things like that, but how do you square it with the general obesity level in the population?

I weigh 75kg now. Some years ago I was 70kg, and also 80kg. I am trying to get back down to 70kg. So there is a 10kg variation for a start.

But I am not exactly "fat"; many people (not just men but also women) of my height are 90kg+. If I had 15kg payload reserve and went from 70 to 90 I would have to give up flying. Looking at other pilots, you don't need a PhD in social science to work out that pilots are often in the obese category.

Then you get the "bigger" blokes who are 90kg without being "fat".

So who buys these microlights? :)

I guess that with an open cockpit there is nowhere to carry anything anyway...

You should hitch a ride one day and enjoy some real flying

How can you when there is just 15kg spare?

[Jan Olieslagers]

If you think we have open cockpits you've really no idea of our way of flying. No surprise.
As for the weight issues, I don't have any as I generally fly alone, though not out of choice...

Yes, with two people of 90 or more kgs, the typical two-seat 80 hp-Rotax-powered microlight would have a legal problem, yes. But one sees remarkably few such heavy-weights around our fields. Perhaps we keep in good trim by doing our own maintenance?

[patowalker]

So who buys these microlights? :)GA pilots who have had enough of the EASA BS. :)

BTW, I have built 3 from kits. One from a factory in Uherske Hradiste and two from different manufacturers in Kunovice.

[A and C]

So to put is very bluntly if a pilot without a life raft has an engine failure over water the chances are he will die in the water even in the summer, in the winter this death is likely to take less than 15 min.

SES can supply a very light single man life raft ( the type that fits into ejection seats) I would think that the limited space on a micro light would not preclude one of these.

Survival Equipment UK | Parachutes | Ejection Seats Servicing | Liferafts (http://www.ses-safety.com)

[dublinpilot]

Bobbing up and down might be uncomfortable but will not kill you. Hypothermia will, and the best protection against that is to avoid getting wet in the first place. So in a weightshift microlight, my number one choice would be to get a decent drysuit/survival suit plus a suitable life vest. Secondary items would be the PLB and something called a RescueStreamer. Or a smoke canister. Or something else that makes you very conspicuous, so the time to locate you is minimized.

As someone who lives on an island, where the only realistic route off it for me is 54nm across open water, this is a subject that I've give a lot of thought to.

Bobbing up and down might not kill you, but uncomfortableness isn't the problem here. The problem is conspiciousy. When warning a dry suit or just a life jacket, only your head sticks out of the water. If you've ever seen the view from a S&R aircraft (I've never been in one, but seen the photos/videos) you're realise that it's next to impossible to see a head popping out of the water when your looking at 10+nm of water in any given direction. The target is simply too small.

This was brought home to me at a S&R organised training evening when S&R showed us a photo from one of their missions. They told us that someone was in the water in the photo, wearing a lifejacket and asked if we could see them. We were in a nice warm room, with a photo that wasn't bouncing around, in good light and with about 30 people looking at it, and not one of us could see the head in the water.

A life raft is a much bigger target and much easier to be seen.

If you just use a dry suit, then you need something else to help you be seen. The smoke canisters (of which I have one) and rescue streemers are good, but also have some drawbacks. Firstly you need to hold onto them until needed (or have them attached to you in some way, which isn't always easy). If they aren't attached to you, then your chances of holding them until needed is slim, as your body gets colder even in a dry suit. They are one time use only, so once used, you don't have a second chance.

Interestingly the S&R team told us that most people let this off too early, when they first see the helicopter. Apparently you need to wait until the helicopter comes quite close to you or they are unlikely to be seen as they will be looking much closer to themselves.

PLB's are a good option, but as Peter said you'll need to hold them out of the water. Some of them (certainly the cheaper McMurdo one) doesn't float and hence the need to hold them out of the water. There was a test done of different models a few years ago to see how long it took them to report in real world conditions, floating on the surface of the sea (for the ones that floated). Most were between 1 and 4 hours if I remember correctly, and this is a long time to be in cold water even in a dry suit. The most popular one, the expensive McMurdo model NEVER got to report the position. It would seem to me that a PLB needs to be kept out of the water, and you just can't do this with your hands. It needs to be in a life raft to have a reasonable chance of working.

The other disadvantage of a dry suit, is that you need to have them for everyone on board. Ok if you're the pilot, but do you have dry suits to fit all your passengers?

And finally the bobbing about does have it's own dangers. Apparently spray from even a light chop in the water is similar to water boarding when you just can't breath without water spray going up your nose, which quickly leads to exhaustion. A spray hood is highly recommended apparently (though I don't have one).

That's not to say that dry suits are no good. They certainly keep you alive a lot longer, and are ok if you have one for everyone on board, but they do nothing to speed up the rescue, so you'll need every one of those additional minutes to give maximum time for rescuse.

It's also unrealistic to think that you'll be rescued inside an hour. This can be the case in ideal circumstances....you're talking to a controller (and many micro pilots prefer not to) you get a mayday out which is heard, and you get a good position report, the ASR helicopter is already in the air and not already on a mission, and the weather/visibility is good and it's not starting to get dark. I think in reality most rescues take longer, though I've no evidence to back this up....it's just the impression I got from our ASR presentation.

All this is not to say that life rafts are a panacea either. They suffer problems too. You need to get it out with you, you need to inflate it, and you need to be able to right it if it inflates upside down. Most importantly you need to be able to get into it. This sounds simple but having tried it in a nice warm swimming pool, I can tell you it's far from straight forward.

The one I tried with had an inflatable step and as a small/light person I didn't have much problems using the step. Most of the others took a few minutes to get in even using the steps, as the steps kept submerging under their weight. Looking UP at the life raft wall from the side if it, while swimming in the pool, I realised that without some aid to getting in (such as the steps) it would be impossible to get in from a swim, even in a nice warm pool.

It's worth thinking about if you plan to go over water. While life rafts might not be a perfect solution, if you manage to get into one you are in a LOT better suitation than if you are in the water in a dry suit.

Oh by the way. The S&R guys reminded people using dry suits that the insulation comes not from the dry suit but the clothing underneeth. Many people don't wear layers of warm clothing underneeth and hence the dry suit doesn't give them the time that they otherwise could expect.

Ditchings might not be very common, but there are is usually at least one every year in the UK.

dp

[BackPacker]

DP, all very good points.

Maybe we should no longer be talking about "survival equipment", but instead talk about a "survival system" (to give it a fancy name). This to suggest that you need a number of components that all need to work together to
- Get both you and the components of the system out of the aircraft (and the type of aircraft may therefore dictate what you need to carry on your body, and what you can reasonably expect to be able to take with you as a separate component - egress from the tub of a submerged weightshift microlight is a whole different game than egress from the cockpit of a low-wing four-seater with gull wing doors or a sliding canopy)
- Keep you dry (and thus warm)
- Keep you out of the water (if possible)
- Keep you more or less healthy and functioning (spray hood, drinking water, seasickness tablets, ...)
and
- Make sure you are found

No single component, whether it's a life jacket, a drysuit, a life raft, a PLB or whatnot, can fulfilll all these tasks. So to say that you need to use a life raft instead of a dry suit (or vice versa) doesn't make sense, as both play a different (though partially overlapping) role in the survival system.

[patowalker]

Ditchings might not be very common, but there are is usually at least one every year in the UK.

AFAIK there have only been 2 microlight fatalities in the Channel and one died when run over by his would-be rescue craft. The other was in mid-winter and the pilot had not donned his drysuit.

Microlight pilots are aware of the risks, but you only have to spend some time at Abbeville on the Blois show weekend to see how many clacukate that risk to be small. On the Dover/CGN crossing, under normal conditions, a microlight is vulnerable to engine failure for under 10 minutes.

[Rod1]

“So to put is very bluntly if a pilot without a life raft has an engine failure over water the chances are he will die in the water even in the summer, !

Cobblers! On the short crossing my MCR is out of gliding range of land for 90sec. Le sleeve is the busiest shipping lane in the world. You often have at least one military vessel and a number of yachts within gliding distance. Most average PPL's will not get into a raft unless they have had specialist training.

Rod1

[abgd]

AFAIK there have only been 2 microlight fatalities in the Channel and one died when run over by his would-be rescue craft. The other was in mid-winter and the pilot had not donned his drysuit.


And one also had paraplegia, which can't have helped him escape.

[peterh337]

There is a particular method for getting into a raft if you find yourself in the water to start with (in fact probably more than one) but the best thing is to have a rapid exit procedure designed to enable you to inflate it outside the cockpit (you would be mad to inflate it inside the cockpit ;) ) and step directly into it, while holding the activation cord to make sure it cannot get away.

I don't think that procedure can be employed with a high wing aircraft unless the hull is sufficiently floaty, for long enough.

It's hard to illustrate without pictures but in essence you bounce your upper body into the raft, and once that is in there, getting the legs in is fairly easy. FWIW, I have practiced it in a pool with a "boat" much smaller than the raft I mentioned earlier.

Obviously one needs to be relatively mobile/flexible to do this.

Once a person is in the raft, it is easy for others to get in.

The thing to absolutely avoid is throwing the raft into the water (inflated or not) hoping that you can swim to it. Wind will carry it away faster than almost anybody can swim.

JO, no point in having a swipe at me, I know what "microlights" look like. I also can't believe that the closed cockpit tricycle gear ones cannot carry a 7kg raft :ugh: Far more likely, it is against the "community culture" to spend money.

[A and C]

Quote:-Cobblers! On the short crossing my MCR is out of gliding range of land for 90sec. Le sleeve is the busiest shipping lane in the world. You often have at least one military vessel and a number of yachts within gliding distance. Most average PPL's will not get into a raft unless they have had specialist training.

I hope we don't have to inscribe this on your headstone, but the numbers when it comes to ditching without a life raft are not with you.

[Jan Olieslagers]

I know what "microlights" look like.
Your remark regarding open cockpits suggested otherwise. Might have been a stab at humour, of course.

I also can't believe that the closed cockpit tricycle gear ones cannot carry a 7kg raft
Nobody said they can't - the issue is solely a legal one. Most of these craft are, or could technically be, certified as LSA's in the USA, without any modification, but with 20% more MTOW, iow a hundred kgs more payload.

Far more likely, it is against the "community culture" to spend money.
Surely microlighting is about pragmatism, and about limited budgets. It takes a rich person today to go blundering about the skies and paying as much as it takes, regardless.
Myself am not going to spend a single penny on a raft until I see clear proof that it has at least some chance of saving my life if/when going down into Neptunus' welcoming waves.

[peterh337]

Might have been a stab at humour, of course.

My birthday is tomorrow, so you are wasting your time expecting humour today :E

Nobody said they can't - the issue is solely a legal one.

Let me have a go at paraphrasing that, in accordance with rules accepted in certain sectors of GA...

It's OK to be XX kg over MTOW if one is just "fat", or if one is carrying an instructor, but it's not OK if it is due to stuff being carried?

Surely microlighting is about pragmatism, and about limited budgets

All of life is about pragmatism and limited budgets...

Myself am not going to spend a single penny on a raft until I see clear proof that it has at least some chance of saving my life

The proof of that one isn't going to be available until the fateful day....

One could say the same about maintenance, etc.

[patowalker]

And one also had paraplegia, which can't have helped him escape.

I think you are mistaken, the paraplegic pilot made it safely to Sydney in a flexwing microlight. The pilot who died in the Channel on his way to Sydney was able-bodied.

There seems to be two different views on here: those who insist on the necessity of a carrying a raft and those who prefer to minimize the need to carry a raft.

[Jan Olieslagers]

Mine is a third view: until I get the subject sorted out, I will not fly out of gliding distance from the beach. Which regrettably keeps me away from this beautiful though somewhat mysterious place called "merry old Engiand" ...

[peterh337]

In flying, one should always have a credible escape route.

For an engine loss over land, it's a forced landing (OK, there are time windows when that will be tricky e.g. forests but one tries to minimise those)

For an engine loss over water, a raft is the only credible option IMHO.

For icing, it's a descent into warmer air (but without hitting the terrain), etc, etc

Not flying over water is fine but it restricts your "fun" options considerably. A £1000 raft is a pretty cost effective way to cover that one.

[DeltaV]

For some, myself included, there is no question of carrying a dinghy to cross the channel. My aircraft is single seat with neither the space nor the payload to carry one yet I have been over and back. Nor was it an option on the more frequent occasions when I have flown longer overwater legs to the Western Isles and the Northern Isles although I do like to cross with sufficient altitude to offer at least a chance of gliding to shore. You either accept the risk or you don't but it's your choice.

One final thought though. Many years ago I read that most engine failures occur when you change some setting, so make all your cruise adjustments and checks before coasting out then touch nothing until you coast in.

[Rod1]

Given the 90 sec the chances are on my side.

30 years ago I was something of an expert at open water survival. As part of a safety research exercise I spent a week based on Guernsey with a team testing kit and techniques. One of the excersises was to take a group of around 30 first year Plymouth poly students, brief them in detail and them put them in the water alongside a fully inflated raft in open water and see what happened. The students were wearing light clothing and personal buoyancy aids. The only students that got into the raft were ones with previous experience. Without training a raft is of very little help. To put out a statement that if your engine fails over a stretch of water 18.5nm wide you are likely to die is just plain wrong unless you are a compete fool and have no plan at all. If you are planing a longer crossing then take it very very seriously.

Rod1

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Mine is a third view: until I get the subject sorted out, I will not fly out of gliding distance from the beach. Which regrettably keeps me away from this beautiful though somewhat mysterious place called "merry old Engiand" ...
I worked out that at FL64 there would at most be a few seconds out of reach of land, so I went anyway.

[peterh337]

Not flying over water, you miss out on a whole lot of interesting places :)

http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/kln94-gps-approach-afms/kln94-kmd550.jpg

[FleetFlyer]

Jan - Get a PLB, lifejackets, and go with someone who has done it before. Provided you are in a machine without a known history of unreliable running, or a poor maintenance history, and you fly as high as you are allowed, then you'll be fine and I promise you'll enjoy it. I find I feel safer giving regular position reports to London Information, and to get onto Lille quickly when I cross the boundary.

If you fly a two-stroke weight-shift, take something else.:ok:

You'll love France, they do GA in the the most wonderfully friendly and easy-going way. I'm now used to being laughed at when asking where to pay the landing fee. French club aviation is just fantastic.

[Jan Olieslagers]

@FleetFlyer: Thank you, the joys of flying in France I have been beginning to discover. It is the UK that must wait.
@Peter: who mentioned NOT flying over water? I have crossed both the rivers Schelde and Meuse!
@GtW: I thought I had done that calculation before, but looked into it again. Surprise! Disregarding wind, and the height of the famous white cliffs of Dover, I calculated 35 kms to cross, so max 18 kms to glide. With a 9:1 glide ratio*, that would require 2000 m of altitude which comes to FL65 in ISA. The one question is whether I'd be allowed to go that high - microlights are normally not allowed in controlled airspace. But I don't yet have any UK maps or charts to check.

*from EuroFOX Aviation Ltd - Aircraft spec and performance (http://www.eurofoxuk.co.uk/page3.htm) - the EuroFox is, ahem, how shall I say, err, closely related to my Apollo Fox. The same web page has some interesting weight figures.

[ChampChump]

If you cross Hope Point to Cap Gris Nez, you will be across in somewhere around 15-25 mins, depending on your aircraft and wind. If you climb to the max allowed as vanilla PPL, VFR, you are pretty much within gliding range of land.

For many of of us whose aeroplanes cannot carry much, the risk is deemed acceptable, if everything else is on our side (preparation, preparation, preparation). I write as one whose aversion to water is extreme, although I work on the same bit mentioned above. I joke that if the worst happens, I ought to be able ditch upwind of any ferry and know at least someone on board.

The joy of flying in France (and beyond) is worth it.

Jan, we'd be happy to see you over here and Headcorn is a most helpful and friendly place to start. FleetFlyer is right.

[magpienja]

Going slight off at a tangent...if flying a flexwing and you need to ditch...what's the recommended procedure for making an escape...if there is one that is....stay with the a/c till it hits the water....or jump from say 20-30ft,

Sound very hazardous trying to get out from one underwater with all those rigging wires.

Nick.

[patowalker]

...if flying a flexwing and you need to ditch...what's the recommended procedure for making an escape...if there is one that is....stay with the a/c till it hits the water....or jump from say 20-30ft,

Try jumping clear of a parked flexwing and you will get an unequivocal answer to that question.

Sound very hazardous trying to get out from one underwater with all those rigging wires.

Considering that the two who died in the Channel got clear of their flexwings, it is obviously not impossible.

[BackPacker]

Sound very hazardous trying to get out from one underwater with all those rigging wires.

The standard tactic for *any* underwater egress is always the same.

- Initially leave your seatbelt fastened.
- Forget what is up or down, just orient yourself against the aircraft.
- Visualize your way out
- Remove any stuff that needs to be removed. Like windows and such. In helicopter egress training we were actually required to do a 10-second mock winding down of the imaginary window. Or something like that.
- With one hand, grab something sturdy in the direction of your exit. When doing inverted helicopter egress training, this was simply the window sill, but in a flexwing you might need to grab the triangle or something like that.
- Only now, with the other hand, unbuckle your seatbelt.
- With the first hand, pull yourself towards your exit point. If your exit point is not very near, you might need to pull yourself hand over hand towards it. It is very important to visualize this beforehand so you can get there by feel. Ignore any up/down sensation. As long as you are in the aircraft the only thing important is to orient yourself in respect to the aircraft.
You should now be clear of the aircraft. Orient yourself and swim up. Or simply deploy the life jacket.

[BossEyed]

Jan, that's twice you've mentioned it. There is no controlled airspace at FL65 (and higher) to concern you when routing from Cap Gris Nez to Dover.

Do it! :D

[BackPacker]

You mean... Other than the Worthing CTA at FL65-FL195 (class A)?

[peterh337]

What chart have you got?

Class A base is FL065 there.

[Jan Olieslagers]

Isn't that what he said? :confused:
Or are you playing on the subtlety of FL65 vs FL065?

[BossEyed]

Oops. :=

Anyway, high enough for a microlight really not to be concerned about the "short" crossing...

[abgd]

I think you are mistaken, the paraplegic pilot made it safely to Sydney in a flexwing microlight. The pilot who died in the Channel on his way to Sydney was able-bodied.

I'm thinking of a pilot who died whilst crossing the channel in a flight with Judy Leden - who wrote about it in her autobiography. I don't have a copy with me right now so can't check the details.

Hang gliders are meant to be very difficult to get out of underwater - my instructor used to compete in the birdman competitions and told me it's not to be underestimated. It may be easier (or harder) in a trike.

[patowalker]

I'm thinking of a pilot who died whilst crossing the channel in a flight with Judy Leden - who wrote about it in her autobiography. I don't have a copy with me right now so can't check the details.

I lent my copy of Flying with Condors and never got it back, but IIRC, Judy's group was on a charity flight in support of paraplegic pilot in a Shadow. The pilot who died was in a trike.

Information on aircraft converted for Disabled Flying Training (http://www.disabledflying.org.uk/apt_aircraft.php)

[patowalker]

Hang gliders are meant to be very difficult to get out of underwater - my instructor used to compete in the birdman competitions and told me it's not to be underestimated. It may be easier (or harder) in a trike.

I will admit to ditching a hang-glider. The worst of it was the embarrassment. Witnesses thought I was done for, but I was treading water under the sail with my head out of the water, trying to undo the carabiner on the hang-strap. I never did manage to undo it, but eventually got a foothold and carried the wing through the surf intact. I then set it down on the beach too early and a wave rode up the sail smashing some battens.

In the water it is always going to be easier to undo a seat belt on your lap than a carabiner at your back. So yes, it would be easier to get out of a trike.

[Sam Rutherford]

I work on the two out of three plan for long water crossings:

1. lifejacket
2. immersion suit
3. raft

Unless crossing the N.Atlantic when it's all three.

For the channel, a lifejacket (worn!) is fine.

It is exceptionally unlikely that you'll end up in the water during the few minutes the crossing takes, and even if this does happen you'll almost certainly be able to ditch near a small boat/yacht who can come and pick you up.

Be realistic about the odds of disaster.

Don't worry about it, go!

Fly (safe!), Sam.

[lenhamlad]

I work at Headcorn and met Dave Sykes the paraplegic who was setting off from Headcorn last year to cross the Channel on the next stage (he had flown down from Yorkshire) of his epic journey to Australia. His first attempt to get to Le Touquet was thwarted when he had to return following a white-out in the Channel. Unlike all those TV celebreties who have support teams, Dave was on his own. He set off the next day and I expected him to get to the south of France at best, before bureaucracy got the better of him but was surprised to read that he had reached Oman and Omanair had kindly offered to sponsor him down to Oz. Oman Air sponsors paraplegic microlight pilot flying the Kangaroo Route - Flight International (http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flight-international/2011/06/oman-air-sponsors-paraplegic-m.html)

We have regular flyouts to the Northern French coast and Belgium. In fact, the last was two weeks ago to Calais. Eight aircraft and roughly twenty flyers descended on Calais to find the Germans had beaten us to it. Six aircraft out of Stuttgart en route to Scotland had landed before us. Normally only PLBs and lifejackets are taken but those with their own aircraft often have their own liferaft.

Thanks Champchump for the kind words about Headcorn. During the Olympic period (14 July-15 August) we have a corrider out of the restricted zone, so flying in the south east will still be easy for those that don't want to file a flightplan and come under Atlas control.