Gentlemen and Gentlewomen:

I am a Cirrus driver, based out of Chicago, and many times I would need to cross Lake Michigan but, due to lack of appendages or some other limitations, I never have done it. I would have no problems doing so, provided that I and one more passengers would have a wetsuit.
I do not like life rafts; I believe that a wetsuit is the better survival gear. Please, advise on your opinion and on you experiences.

i'm not formiliar with the wheather in chigaco, but when it get colder you really want a drysuit and a liferaft.

A wet or a drysuit will keep you warm in the water, but only for a limited time. Because your IN the water and exposed to the wind. You also have to time your breathing, because you don't float well enough in a suit.
A liferaft will keep you out of the water, provide protection against the wind and have more survival equipment on board.

I did a maritime survival course not to long ago and i really like a liferaft. You simply can't get the same protection in a suit.

And don't forget a PFD, incase you only got the suit. It keeps you head just a little higher and that makes a big diffrence. Atleast when it's properly fitted.

I sail a dinghy on an inland lake and have a drysuit and wetsuit. At this time of year in the UK, the water temp is probably around 5 deg C. At the weekend we capsized and unfortunately my dry suit was not quite zipped up correctly. It was enlightening - just a couple of pints of very cold water inside the suit made me effectively useless for the recovery, my muscles started cramping fairly quickly, and had we spent longer than the 10 minutes or so it took to recover, I would have been hypothermic.

The summer weight wetsuit, whilst keeping me slightly warmer than a compromised dry suit, would, in my estimation have given me a few more (15 - 20) minutes of useful activity, but on no account would it have been a survival suit.

The drysuit would normally give me 30 mins to an hour of useful exertion in water of that temp, with perhaps another hour of gradually degrading performance.

The other point to remeber is that these suits are hot out of the water. I didn't wear anything useful under the dry suit as the sun was out and the air temp at 14 deg C would have made the suit unbearable. Wetsuits are similar - any form of exertion out of the water and you will potentially over heat.

So, in summary, no way will a wetsuit be a useful survival suit in the lakes unless you could be sure of rescue in minutes. A dry suit will give you a couple of hours. A liferaft is infinately more useful - you must get out of the water to survive.

Please forgive my ignorance, but I am unclear as to neither what a “Cirrus driver” is or does nor the statement “lack of appendages” means. Could you enlighten me as to their meanings?

“I am a Cirrus driver, based out of Chicago, and many times I would need to cross Lake Michigan but, due to lack of appendages or some other limitations, I never have done it.”

As far as a suit vs. raft: As several have stated, staying out of the water with appropriate insulative clothing/suit is preferable to being in the water. However, there are two suits, that while they must be donned (not really for fulltime wear) might be useful. Mustang makes both, the Ocean Commander and the Ice Commander suits will allow for both hypothermia protection and floatation. Both are dry suits, but even with these, there are time limits in water.

Pete

Hi, and welcome! Not a marine guy myself, but even this time of year the Lake can be pretty cold (and lonely if you are far from shore). Not sure how much time a wetsuit will buy you, but one thing I've learned on these forums is that you need to 1) be prepared and 2) overestimate your needs by at least a factor of 3 <img src="/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

I've often wondered what sort of suit the guys fishing in Alaska wear, because they are always moving and exerting and even in freezing cold, you can get hot in a suit like that. But it has to be able to keep you from going hypothermic instantly in the freezing water and would have to keep you afloat (face up).

Anyway, make sure you are properly equipped, bring a raft whether you like them or not, stock it with survival gear and carry a PLB. After watching a few marine survival shows, I gotta say, I'd rather be caught naked in the woods than floating at sea without much in the way of gear.

Let me quote the advice that is given to anyone operating around the coast of Great Britain by the Coast Guard & by the Royal Navy. Which is: IF YOU DON'T GET OUT OF THE WATER BLOODY QUICK, YOU ARE DEAD!! Survival time in the water is anything between 2 mins & 30 mins. Incapacity in half that time. Wear a proper survival suit and get yourself a double bottomed raft. If you do die, no raft & no suit might mean no money from your insurers. Great place to leave your Missus and kids.

Dear Pete:

I fly a Cirrus SR22, that is based out of the Chicagoland area. I could save about 20-40 minutes depending on the direction of travel if I elect to fly across Lake Michigan but, the ditching possibility always prevented me from doing so.
I remember that many years ago, on an August day, I went into the lake just off of Montrose Harbor but, when it got knee deep I could not take the cold anymore and ran out. Based on that limited experience, I developed a lot of respect toward the Lake.
I got the message that the raft is the right solution.

Thanks for all the input,

Got ya.

In addition to a raft, you may want to look at a Mustang Aviation Survival Suit. They have thermal, flotation and flash protection built-in to the suit. Not cheap, but are design to wear during flight operations.

Mustang Constant Wear Aviation Survival System MAC 2000

Pete

I'd take the longer route.

The water is cold. Very, very cold.

You also have a potential of going inverted. That means game over -- you'll never get your gear, passenger(s) and yourself out. Then you need to get everything together and in place. And we haven't discussed weather conditions yet.

All this work and risk to save 20 - 40 minutes? I suggest it does not add up.

(I know we haven't disussed the plane's parachute but I don't think it's an advantage over water)