I sense the old question of helmets for crews is going to surface again soon, so it may as well be here, and it is a good point raised. There are many pros and cons, and whether it would have helped in the cougar accident is possibly doubtful, but the example above shows that quite possibly a helmet saved two lives. I have known quite a few people who have escaped accidents relatively unharmed, albeit with chunks missing from the helmet. There is generally far more to meet you face and head in the cockpit than in the cabin, and as many will testify to, the event is not over on impact with, or landing on the water. It is vitally important that the crew are still in some sort of conscious state to sort out the ensuing mess, including getting the aircraft properly stabilised and shut down, floats and rafts deployed, and the co-ordination of the egress. Many will complain of discomfort from wearing helmets, but modern design is making this easier. The problem is, as ever money, and until the oil companies push for it, it probably wont be properly implemented. There is always of course a psychological element to ditching, and it is very hard to blame any pilots for this. I hope this is covered in the report, and the idea of ditching in heavy seas with very cold temperatures will never be appealing, especially if one does not have full confidence in safety measures. It remains that most crews do not fly with helmets nor any form of re-breathing apparatus or STAS (Short Term Air Supply), and it just might be possible that this is one small factor that adds to the delay to ditch straight away, when possibly one should. The decision to ditch will never be an easy one, and never be completely black and white. It will be a complex analysis of many factors and a decision based on an assessment, not least of which is "what gives us all the best chance of survival?". Cold water, heavy seas, maybe darkness, no rebreather/STAS, relatively long rescue time, poor survival suits will all pretty much stack the odds in favour of at least a few deaths in most cases. A difficult decision indeed, but maybe it would be a little easier if the best available survival equipment was made available to all, thus mitigating at least one of the factors for assessment.