A night ditching has its own hazards. You won't see the water until the landing lights illuminate it. So in the simulator you don't have to rely on the visual scene to judge when to flare. In fact you may as well switch off the visuals to simulate a black night. The skill is in the instrument flying bit. To allow for altimeter error you need to be fully configured and on speed early.

For regular maneuvering, the lack of G in the sim is not a factor. In a 30 deg banked turn, (which is more than what you see the vast majority of the time) the G is 1.15, which doesn't feel appreciably different from 1. So you don't notice anything.

Rolling into and out of 45 degree banked turns (1.4 G's) the lack does throw me off a bit, but it's a minor distraction.

The real difference comes in a dive pullout after a stall or unusual attitude recovery, and there's nothing that can be done about that.

Wikipedia has just 24 articles on airliner ditchings.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catego...lving_ditching

The impact forces are primarily a function of the rate of descent at touchdown. With unlimited runway length the flight speed is far less important. More important is the optimum pitch attitude, which will dictate the horizontal speed at impact.

Part of the problem is that manuals may provide a procedure for all engines out, and a procedure for ditching. The ditching procedure supposes that you can maintain a certain speed and control the vertical speed with engine thrust. With all engines out you cannot maintain VREF40 and 200 - 300 fpm. Your rate of descent will be more like 500 - 600 fpm. That means that the normal approach speed is too low for a successful flare to ideally zero fpm rate of descent. You need to carry some extra speed during the approach that you then bleed off at low height and minimal vertical speed.

Someone asked if model ditching test are done with airliners. Yes, they are required for certification of transport airplanes approved for long overwater flights.

A ditching is a ditching. The difference is with power or without power? Obviously with power should be easier. Without power your rate of descent at touchdown does not have to be 500-600 FPM. You can make it as smooth as a normal touchdown if the sea state is fairly calm. You just need to maintain excess speed and trade that off, in the flare, until you're approaching the desired touchdown speed. With waves the equation to do it becomes much more difficult.

The reason US 1549 hit so hard in the Hudson is because Sully had run out of airspeed at over 100' AGL and was AOA limited. From that point on the AOA limiter prevented a stall but the lack of available airspeed (AOA) prevented any attempt at flaring to reduce the rate of descent at water impact.

The US 1549 investigation mentions using excess airspeed and converting that into a flare to reduce impact forces. Guys have to figure this out beforehand because there's no ability to regain airspeed at low altitude once you squander your airspeed and you have no power available.

:ok:

You've got it

This is also probably the main reason. It gives SLF hope. Bit like the crews of various cold war bomber aircraft (particularly those in the pit below or behind the cockpit). No bang seats like the pilots but parachutes and an escape door - very slim chance of successful use if the aircraft was going down, but at least a slim chance is better than none.

At my initial SEP when I joined easyjet it was explained that " a ditching was very unlikely because we don't fly over sea much"

I mentioned that a friend of mine had ditched a large aircraft just off the scotish coast due to fire and my last employer almost put and a/c in the sea off jersey by putting both props to feather instead of cruise.

You don't have to be mid Atlantic or lose both engines to end up in the drink!