Single engine over water
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Single engine over water
Some food for thought.
Over a number of years and a few hundred hours of flying light singles I have had few qualms about flying aircraft over water. I have made a number of channel crossings via long and short routes, a couple of North Sea hops and once flew a Pitts from Italy to France across the Gulf of Genoa and then offshore along the coast at low level to clear Nice.
I subscribed to the school of thought that aircraft engines are reliable and don’t fail. Besides, engine failure over a lot of terrain would be worse than over the sea.
Last Sunday I was flying from Germany to the UK via a direct route across the North Sea. The aircraft was a well-maintained large single on a public transport C of A. The aircraft was just out of a 50 hour check and the outward flight had been uneventful.
The weather across the continent was pretty lousy and there was a strong headwind. During the flight I considered amending the flight plan and routing down the Belgian coast to make the crossing via Calais as I didn’t fancy a long low flight across the sea. Low because the freezing level was forecast at 4000’. About 15 miles to run to the Haamstede VOR on the Dutch Coast the weather cleared and looked fair for the crossing. About 2 miles from coasting outbound the engine suffered what the Dutch mechanics have subsequently described as a catastrophic failure (full details not yet known but oil all over the underside of the aircraft and none on the dipstick when examined on the ground). The resultant diversion to Rotterdam with a rough running engine, power loss and smoke was relatively uneventful and resulted in a safe arrival on the runway. A big thank you has to go to Amsterdam and Rotterdam ATC, the airport management and the airport fire service.
We were equipped with life jackets, raft, ELT, backup Icom and GPS in a sealed plastic bag and (albeit some years ago) I passed the RAF sea survival course. We didn’t have immersion suits. The occupants were all experienced pilots and we had briefed evacuation in the event of a ditching (who out of which doors and who taking life raft and going where etc.) Despite all of these precautions, none of us really expected a failure over water and any real likelihood of having to ditch. We were all confident in making the crossing as we had been on the outward flight.
Had the failure occurred 15+ minutes later we would have ended up in the North Sea which would doesn’t bear thinking about at this time of year.
Statistically I should now be safe for the next few hundred years but I’m not sure that I will make a long (i.e. North Sea) crossing again in a single again and certainly not without a survival suit. Some might say that I’ve lost my bottle but I’m not usually a timid person (apart from flying my hobbies are skydiving and bobsleighing – the latter being the purpose of the trip). Having reflected on how lucky we were I now realise that there is a real risk in making such a long over water flight.
Over a number of years and a few hundred hours of flying light singles I have had few qualms about flying aircraft over water. I have made a number of channel crossings via long and short routes, a couple of North Sea hops and once flew a Pitts from Italy to France across the Gulf of Genoa and then offshore along the coast at low level to clear Nice.
I subscribed to the school of thought that aircraft engines are reliable and don’t fail. Besides, engine failure over a lot of terrain would be worse than over the sea.
Last Sunday I was flying from Germany to the UK via a direct route across the North Sea. The aircraft was a well-maintained large single on a public transport C of A. The aircraft was just out of a 50 hour check and the outward flight had been uneventful.
The weather across the continent was pretty lousy and there was a strong headwind. During the flight I considered amending the flight plan and routing down the Belgian coast to make the crossing via Calais as I didn’t fancy a long low flight across the sea. Low because the freezing level was forecast at 4000’. About 15 miles to run to the Haamstede VOR on the Dutch Coast the weather cleared and looked fair for the crossing. About 2 miles from coasting outbound the engine suffered what the Dutch mechanics have subsequently described as a catastrophic failure (full details not yet known but oil all over the underside of the aircraft and none on the dipstick when examined on the ground). The resultant diversion to Rotterdam with a rough running engine, power loss and smoke was relatively uneventful and resulted in a safe arrival on the runway. A big thank you has to go to Amsterdam and Rotterdam ATC, the airport management and the airport fire service.
We were equipped with life jackets, raft, ELT, backup Icom and GPS in a sealed plastic bag and (albeit some years ago) I passed the RAF sea survival course. We didn’t have immersion suits. The occupants were all experienced pilots and we had briefed evacuation in the event of a ditching (who out of which doors and who taking life raft and going where etc.) Despite all of these precautions, none of us really expected a failure over water and any real likelihood of having to ditch. We were all confident in making the crossing as we had been on the outward flight.
Had the failure occurred 15+ minutes later we would have ended up in the North Sea which would doesn’t bear thinking about at this time of year.
Statistically I should now be safe for the next few hundred years but I’m not sure that I will make a long (i.e. North Sea) crossing again in a single again and certainly not without a survival suit. Some might say that I’ve lost my bottle but I’m not usually a timid person (apart from flying my hobbies are skydiving and bobsleighing – the latter being the purpose of the trip). Having reflected on how lucky we were I now realise that there is a real risk in making such a long over water flight.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: cheltenham
Age: 54
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Legalapproach
Well done for returning to earth in one piece
I had a catastrophic failure just after crossing from Le Touqet and know exactly how you feel.
I have crossed since to Jersey and to Dinard but dont feel nearly as confident about it as I used.
It brings me again to the subject that I posted in another thread.
Here
I still cant get my head round certain issues with flying in IMC in a single engined aircraft with cloud below the highest terrain.
I hear pilots say "you must be mad crossing the channel in a sep without a liferaft" yet they are quite happy to fly over the sort of terrain in Scotland in thick IMC!!!
Which is worse?
Engine failure over water?
OR
Engine failure over mountains that are covered in cloud?
Well done for returning to earth in one piece
I had a catastrophic failure just after crossing from Le Touqet and know exactly how you feel.
I have crossed since to Jersey and to Dinard but dont feel nearly as confident about it as I used.
It brings me again to the subject that I posted in another thread.
Here
I still cant get my head round certain issues with flying in IMC in a single engined aircraft with cloud below the highest terrain.
I hear pilots say "you must be mad crossing the channel in a sep without a liferaft" yet they are quite happy to fly over the sort of terrain in Scotland in thick IMC!!!
Which is worse?
Engine failure over water?
OR
Engine failure over mountains that are covered in cloud?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: TL487591
Posts: 1,639
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suffered an engine failure in an Arrow over the Irish Sea 10 years ago, having like you, been a pretty fearless crosser of water in SEPs.
Also like you, luck was on my side, and I had enough height to glide to land on Irish terra firma, a frustratingly few miles from the airport
The fact that we have both experienced an engine failure has not changed the laws of probability relating to engine failures, and the fact that we have experienced one makes us no more or less likely to experience another one the next time we get into an aircraft.
Sometimes it takes an actual occurence to bring home what a 1 in 3500 flying hours chance actually means. People often focus on the probability and not on the impact.
I still get into SEPs (and MEPs) and fly across large expanses of water, but I tend not to pack my wife and children in with me...
Also like you, luck was on my side, and I had enough height to glide to land on Irish terra firma, a frustratingly few miles from the airport
The fact that we have both experienced an engine failure has not changed the laws of probability relating to engine failures, and the fact that we have experienced one makes us no more or less likely to experience another one the next time we get into an aircraft.
Sometimes it takes an actual occurence to bring home what a 1 in 3500 flying hours chance actually means. People often focus on the probability and not on the impact.
I still get into SEPs (and MEPs) and fly across large expanses of water, but I tend not to pack my wife and children in with me...
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the engine failure statistics disguise a huge standard deviation - because of the great average age of the GA fleet and the great variation in maintenance standards. But it's hard to collect data on this point because not enough engines fail enough times before they are scrapped.
Personally I fly happily over the channel at its widest point, wearing a life jacket and with a raft on the seat next to me, or on the back seat iof there is a passenger.
What I would not do is
- cross water beyond glide distance if the surface conditions would make life raft entry hard or impossible (e.g. now, with F7+ winds and heavy seas).
- fly at night over land when it's really pitch black
- fly in IMC when cloud is below say 300ft AGL
- fly anywhere if icing level is below MSA, unless the cloudbase is definitely above MSA all the way.
The above conditions (except for the last one) are basically Russian roulette, as far as I can see. The last one I am willing to risk if the layer isn't more than say 3000ft thick and I am doing a long flight to a much nicer climate...
But I am quite happy to takeoff in 200ft cloudbase and 1800m vis if right away down below is just calm water; water is water and is same everywhere
Personally I fly happily over the channel at its widest point, wearing a life jacket and with a raft on the seat next to me, or on the back seat iof there is a passenger.
What I would not do is
- cross water beyond glide distance if the surface conditions would make life raft entry hard or impossible (e.g. now, with F7+ winds and heavy seas).
- fly at night over land when it's really pitch black
- fly in IMC when cloud is below say 300ft AGL
- fly anywhere if icing level is below MSA, unless the cloudbase is definitely above MSA all the way.
The above conditions (except for the last one) are basically Russian roulette, as far as I can see. The last one I am willing to risk if the layer isn't more than say 3000ft thick and I am doing a long flight to a much nicer climate...
But I am quite happy to takeoff in 200ft cloudbase and 1800m vis if right away down below is just calm water; water is water and is same everywhere
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that people get de-sensitised to something which they do regularly.
During a mountain-flying checkout (VFR), I was shocked at how few emergency landing possibilities there were. I asked my instructor where he'd put the aircraft if the engine quit. He thought about it for a minute, and then said: "Hmm, not many options are there? I guess I'd probably try to get close enough to the road that someone might see me crash and try to help me." This instructor had spent enough hours flying SEPs over mountains, without having had an engine failure, to not consider it a big enough risk to worry about any more. The same way that many of us don't worry about crossing the Channel, I suppose.
FFF
--------------
During a mountain-flying checkout (VFR), I was shocked at how few emergency landing possibilities there were. I asked my instructor where he'd put the aircraft if the engine quit. He thought about it for a minute, and then said: "Hmm, not many options are there? I guess I'd probably try to get close enough to the road that someone might see me crash and try to help me." This instructor had spent enough hours flying SEPs over mountains, without having had an engine failure, to not consider it a big enough risk to worry about any more. The same way that many of us don't worry about crossing the Channel, I suppose.
FFF
--------------
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FFF
I agree, but I think one can still separate out the situations where one would be in some control of the touchdown, and where it would be pure chance if the plane didn't get wrecked.
I agree, but I think one can still separate out the situations where one would be in some control of the touchdown, and where it would be pure chance if the plane didn't get wrecked.
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Statistically I should now be safe for the next few hundred years
As 2D says, the statistics just cannot be relied on for predicting this kind of thing.
Here's an interesting statistic for you. In the past four years, 20% of my flights in singles have resulted in a ditching
Will
Guest
Posts: n/a
Preparation
LegalApproach, it sounds like you had done about as much as possible in terms of preparing for the eventuality. In UK waters, hypothermia is the killer, so proper preparation, wearing of survival (dry) suit, carriage of life raft, etc, is necessary.
How many pilots of sep's put the life raft in the boot? Or don't wear life vests? Or don't carry emergency flares or EPIRB? All these things can contribute to one's survival if the inevitable happens.
A further consideration is that on water (which, barring swell & waves, is at least in general flat and unobstructed) you do have a reasonable chance of being spotted by SAR personnel.
I flew some years ago over the Finnish steppes, which were covered in about 12-foot high close-packed scrub. One's sep would have disappeared in the scrub and I dread to think of one's chances in case of injury.
DT.
P.s. LegalApproach, would you let us know the outcome of the investigation? I note the comment in your story of the "just out of 50 hour" bit. That always sounds a bit ominous.
How many pilots of sep's put the life raft in the boot? Or don't wear life vests? Or don't carry emergency flares or EPIRB? All these things can contribute to one's survival if the inevitable happens.
A further consideration is that on water (which, barring swell & waves, is at least in general flat and unobstructed) you do have a reasonable chance of being spotted by SAR personnel.
I flew some years ago over the Finnish steppes, which were covered in about 12-foot high close-packed scrub. One's sep would have disappeared in the scrub and I dread to think of one's chances in case of injury.
DT.
P.s. LegalApproach, would you let us know the outcome of the investigation? I note the comment in your story of the "just out of 50 hour" bit. That always sounds a bit ominous.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: behind the lens
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting post. I was planning Ostend the weekend before last and I mean PLAN.
Making such trips in different seasons throws many variables into the equation. In summertime, my attitude to the trip is totally different to making the same trip at this time of the year. When you know you can survive for a few hours in our coastal waters - assumimg you survive the ditching, a lot of the anxiety is removed.
This time of the year, I would not count one's chances too highly unless you came down very close to passing shipping. I tend to cross at a minimum of Fl 6,0 - that gives me thinking time, glide distance and the chance to use R/T and look for the "target" ship - let alone maybe some problem solving time.
I think as you point out, it all depends where the icing layer is and can you remain clear of controlled airspace in clear air above to give you sufficient time to think.
I think the only other real concern about being in a single is at night, particularly when departing an airfield in a built up area - that makes me think! But hey, we still get out of bed most mornings.............and when did you last risk assess that!
Making such trips in different seasons throws many variables into the equation. In summertime, my attitude to the trip is totally different to making the same trip at this time of the year. When you know you can survive for a few hours in our coastal waters - assumimg you survive the ditching, a lot of the anxiety is removed.
This time of the year, I would not count one's chances too highly unless you came down very close to passing shipping. I tend to cross at a minimum of Fl 6,0 - that gives me thinking time, glide distance and the chance to use R/T and look for the "target" ship - let alone maybe some problem solving time.
I think as you point out, it all depends where the icing layer is and can you remain clear of controlled airspace in clear air above to give you sufficient time to think.
I think the only other real concern about being in a single is at night, particularly when departing an airfield in a built up area - that makes me think! But hey, we still get out of bed most mornings.............and when did you last risk assess that!
Carbonfibre-based lifeform
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WCollins,
That must have had the 'Flyer' team holding their breath when you crossed the Thames in the 172 for your (very interesting) airspace article! 
In the past four years, 20% of my flights in singles have resulted in a ditching
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: N.E. Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I too would rather be lucky than great. Doesn't matter how great you are, it won't win you the lottery....
I had a catastrophic engine failure whilst solo during PPL training but 'luckily' was just four miles from the airfield I'd just departed and made it back.
Since then I've done an over-water trip to Guernsey via the long route (around 70nm or so from Solent, but I can't remember the exact number). We had life jackets plus raft, but it was in mid-summer (although I'm sure the water would still have been very cold, it would have been considerably less so than this time of year). I'd happily do it again - in summer and in good weather - but I guess it's all about an individual's decision on whether the risk is so small as to be acceptable for the trip being considered.
Each time we climb behind the wheel of a car, or get in as a passenger for that matter, I think we are taking a greater risk than doing an over-water flight in good weather conditions where all possible precautions have been taken. But we rarely think about the frailty of our tin-can on four wheels whilst zooming along the road, and remember that in a car you have other drivers to contend with. I would imagine that statistically you're far more likely to be injured or killed on the roads than in a light aircraft despite the vast difference in number of hours behind the wheel/yoke (I don't know that for a fact and stand to be corrected) but we see driving as an acceptable risk under the circumstances - i.e. when we need to get somewhere.
Very well done on the successful diversion, and I wish you 'lucky' as well as safe flying.
WCollins - next time I cross the Humber do you think I'd be safer taking an extra engine? (perhaps one of those paramotors as well just to be sure..)
I had a catastrophic engine failure whilst solo during PPL training but 'luckily' was just four miles from the airfield I'd just departed and made it back.
Since then I've done an over-water trip to Guernsey via the long route (around 70nm or so from Solent, but I can't remember the exact number). We had life jackets plus raft, but it was in mid-summer (although I'm sure the water would still have been very cold, it would have been considerably less so than this time of year). I'd happily do it again - in summer and in good weather - but I guess it's all about an individual's decision on whether the risk is so small as to be acceptable for the trip being considered.
Each time we climb behind the wheel of a car, or get in as a passenger for that matter, I think we are taking a greater risk than doing an over-water flight in good weather conditions where all possible precautions have been taken. But we rarely think about the frailty of our tin-can on four wheels whilst zooming along the road, and remember that in a car you have other drivers to contend with. I would imagine that statistically you're far more likely to be injured or killed on the roads than in a light aircraft despite the vast difference in number of hours behind the wheel/yoke (I don't know that for a fact and stand to be corrected) but we see driving as an acceptable risk under the circumstances - i.e. when we need to get somewhere.
Very well done on the successful diversion, and I wish you 'lucky' as well as safe flying.
WCollins - next time I cross the Humber do you think I'd be safer taking an extra engine? (perhaps one of those paramotors as well just to be sure..)
Actually you are far safer in a car.
General aviation stats show you are about as safe in a plane as you are on a motorbike and at about three times the risk that you are in a car.
If you fly a speciality, experimental, amateur built, floats or amphibian, etc the risk is substantially higher.
FoF and IO540
Know what you mean about nowhere to go. If I want to go more than 5 miles from home base I am flying in the mountains and often there is NOWHERE to go. Most of the time It is not even a matter of choice, 60 deg slope on rocks, ,60 deg slope with trees, valley bottom huge boulders and trees , well that may be a choice but the result is going to be the same.
As for finding someone to crash in front of, planes disappear for years only five or ten miles from civilisation here, once they fall through the canopy even serious searching does not find them.
General aviation stats show you are about as safe in a plane as you are on a motorbike and at about three times the risk that you are in a car.
If you fly a speciality, experimental, amateur built, floats or amphibian, etc the risk is substantially higher.
FoF and IO540
Know what you mean about nowhere to go. If I want to go more than 5 miles from home base I am flying in the mountains and often there is NOWHERE to go. Most of the time It is not even a matter of choice, 60 deg slope on rocks, ,60 deg slope with trees, valley bottom huge boulders and trees , well that may be a choice but the result is going to be the same.
As for finding someone to crash in front of, planes disappear for years only five or ten miles from civilisation here, once they fall through the canopy even serious searching does not find them.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those who proclaim that flying is safer than driving your car are kidding themselves (and their passengers)
If you look at the statistics it is actually flying on the airlines which is the safest mode of transport. Not the sort of flying that we do!
I am a coward when it comes to flying in a SEP and will always try to go the shortest way or if that is not possible certainly the highest possible.
Taking off from Alderney last summer I was given the usual 'not above 1000ft' but after a few minutes they must have got sick of my pestering them for higher so they gave a higher clearance.
A lot of folks get very hung up about 'longer routes' but if you have a look with something like Flitestar and compare some routes you will be surprised the limited time 'lost' by going the long way around.
If you go Wellesbourn -> CLN -> HSD -> EDLV which in total is just 1h58 and compare that to EGBW -> DVR -> MK -> EDLV which is 2h04 or a total of 6 mins extra. And that is in something as mundane as a PA32.
I know what I prefer.
FD
If you look at the statistics it is actually flying on the airlines which is the safest mode of transport. Not the sort of flying that we do!
I am a coward when it comes to flying in a SEP and will always try to go the shortest way or if that is not possible certainly the highest possible.
Taking off from Alderney last summer I was given the usual 'not above 1000ft' but after a few minutes they must have got sick of my pestering them for higher so they gave a higher clearance.
A lot of folks get very hung up about 'longer routes' but if you have a look with something like Flitestar and compare some routes you will be surprised the limited time 'lost' by going the long way around.
If you go Wellesbourn -> CLN -> HSD -> EDLV which in total is just 1h58 and compare that to EGBW -> DVR -> MK -> EDLV which is 2h04 or a total of 6 mins extra. And that is in something as mundane as a PA32.
I know what I prefer.
FD
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Load the dice !
As stated above light aircraft flying and riding a motorbike have the same level of risk acording to the stats.
The big differance is that 70% of motorbike accidents are NOT the fault of the biker and are visited apon them by other road users.
Flying is some what different with the pilot usualy having greater control of the situation and so as a pilot you have a much greater chance to load the dice in your favor.
Your actions as a pilot will have a much greater effect on your fate than your actions as a motorist , ask your self why is one club much cheaper to rent from that another ?. Could it be that they are cutting corners on maintenance for instance.
I could go on but you can minimise the risks to a point at which the risks in flying are no greater than other day to day activitys that we all take for granted.
The big differance is that 70% of motorbike accidents are NOT the fault of the biker and are visited apon them by other road users.
Flying is some what different with the pilot usualy having greater control of the situation and so as a pilot you have a much greater chance to load the dice in your favor.
Your actions as a pilot will have a much greater effect on your fate than your actions as a motorist , ask your self why is one club much cheaper to rent from that another ?. Could it be that they are cutting corners on maintenance for instance.
I could go on but you can minimise the risks to a point at which the risks in flying are no greater than other day to day activitys that we all take for granted.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,085
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ask yourself why is one club much cheaper to rent from than another? Could it be that they are cutting corners on maintenance, for instance.
Unfortunately, I have to agree that those who think that its safer in a car than in a light aircraft are simply kidding themselves.
Two American AOPA books worth reading are Crises in the Cockpit and (especially) Defensive Flying (both by Norbert Slepyan). They provide practical and specific advice as to how you can decrease the odds of an accident.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern England
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to agree with all of you who have posted so far. I'm happy to do SEP over water with life jackets & rafts and an ELB in the summer. If I flew in the winter (which I don't at the moment) then I'd also consider an immersion suit as well.
Last summer, I was renting a new a/c (to me) at a new airfield (to me) and the a/c came with life jackets but no raft. So I asked around to see if I could rent one for trip with a longer over water stretch and was amazed by the number of people tried to convince me they are a waste of time and not to bother with one. The "barman" was particularly verbose about this –I tried to point out that most people survive ditching and then hypothermia is the next big thing to deal with, but he didn’t want to listen. I hate to think what other pearls of wisdom he offers student pilots who might not know better.
Last summer, I was renting a new a/c (to me) at a new airfield (to me) and the a/c came with life jackets but no raft. So I asked around to see if I could rent one for trip with a longer over water stretch and was amazed by the number of people tried to convince me they are a waste of time and not to bother with one. The "barman" was particularly verbose about this –I tried to point out that most people survive ditching and then hypothermia is the next big thing to deal with, but he didn’t want to listen. I hate to think what other pearls of wisdom he offers student pilots who might not know better.
Sub Judice Angel Lovegod
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London
Posts: 2,456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't want to keep banging on about my experience of ditching but....
We were in the Tay Estuary for 15-30 mins in October. I don't know what the temperature was, but probably between 5 and 10 deg.
My elderly parents were only in the water for 15 mins and suffered palpable shock, which my mother is only just getting over, and hypothermia.
The pilot and I were in the water for thirty minutes. He is small and thin and after about 20 mins was really suffering. I noticed signs that he was losing concentration, and between 20 and 30 mins was having to keep shouting at him and give him progress reports on the rescue just to keep him "with me." I am big and fat, so didn't feel the cold quite so quickly, but I didn't have the strength to get into the hovercraft, and on arrival in hospital, after 20 mins in a space blanket my temperature was 33deg.
I reckon that I am still feeling the after affects in terms of tiredness and loss of concentration.
And that was 30 mins in relatively warm water.
Get a dinghy, keep it somewhere you can get at it, learn how to get into it...or get another engine. IMO.
Will
We were in the Tay Estuary for 15-30 mins in October. I don't know what the temperature was, but probably between 5 and 10 deg.
My elderly parents were only in the water for 15 mins and suffered palpable shock, which my mother is only just getting over, and hypothermia.
The pilot and I were in the water for thirty minutes. He is small and thin and after about 20 mins was really suffering. I noticed signs that he was losing concentration, and between 20 and 30 mins was having to keep shouting at him and give him progress reports on the rescue just to keep him "with me." I am big and fat, so didn't feel the cold quite so quickly, but I didn't have the strength to get into the hovercraft, and on arrival in hospital, after 20 mins in a space blanket my temperature was 33deg.
I reckon that I am still feeling the after affects in terms of tiredness and loss of concentration.
And that was 30 mins in relatively warm water.
Get a dinghy, keep it somewhere you can get at it, learn how to get into it...or get another engine. IMO.
Will
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Bordeaux, France
Posts: 581
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Listen to wcollins......Think about this.....
There is a reason why every time I get on a chopper to go to work, winter or summer, I have to wear 3 layers of clothing and an immersion suit (in winter an additional bodysuit too). If the chopper ditches OK and I have to go in the water it is probably the cold that will kill me. I do a 3day offshore survival course every three years and the one thing drummed into you is that cold is a killer - Cold shock and Hypoythermia lead to death.
The North Sea surface water temperature is 2-6°C in winter, 14-17°C in summer.
I am afraid that I am a coward and try not to fly over water unless I can glide to the beach/land.
Regards, SD..
PS. wcollins, you are probably luckier than you think if you had no survival aids at all.
The North Sea surface water temperature is 2-6°C in winter, 14-17°C in summer.
I am afraid that I am a coward and try not to fly over water unless I can glide to the beach/land.
Regards, SD..
PS. wcollins, you are probably luckier than you think if you had no survival aids at all.