The fatal accident rate is therefore probably of the order of one fatal accident per 10 million nm, or 1 per 20 million km.
Since I brought up the subject, I might as well defend my stance. I was not talking about the generic GA accident rate vs. car accident rates, but the specific GA accident of having an engine failure out of gliding distance of land, and dying either because of impact forces during the ditching, drowning or hypothermia. How many GA accidents fall under that category, and how many engine failures, forced landings, CFIT accidents, midairs, landing mishaps and such do happen over land, where all the money spent on life vests, exposure suits and life rafts is not going to make a difference?
So if you have a thousand euros to spend, arguably, it should be spent on a safer car, car driver training, emergency/forced landing practice, IMC training and maybe some other things (an Allen Carr book perhaps) before acquiring a life raft makes sense for the average GA pilot. Looking at pure cost/benefit, that is.
At least a PLB will help you in case of a forced landing over land too.
The jacket will keep you afloat, it doesnt reduce the risk of hypothermia.
Yes it does, but indirectly. With a jacket you don't have to thread water. This means you can huddle together as a group and stay as still as possible, so that the thin layer of water around you that you have so carefully warmed up, doesn't wash away that easily.
Tip: if you ever do find yourself without an immersion suit, but with a life jacket in cold water, tuck your trousers in your socks, put elastic bands or something around your sleeves and also try to seal your neck the best you can. Don't let that warm water wash away. And put something, anything, on your head to prevent exposure. Even a plastic bucket is better than nothing.