I recently saw a dutch program that tests all sorts of things (equivalent to 'your' Mythbusters). This time they visited a sea-survival centre in Holland.
In that centre they went into a machine that simulates a ditching with a helicopter in the sea (helicopter dunk-tank).
The actual ditching went very, very slow in the test,the opposit of a real ditching, so I thought.
Is it a good preparation for those, who might have to do it for real once? Or are they getting a false sence of security by only learning how a slow ditching feels and not a actual one?

Or is it to dangerous to increase the speed of the ditching a bit?
<img src="/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

i have been in a heli-ditch simulator and trust me, it really doesn't feel to sinks very slowly... You' r head will be down in 2 to 4 seconds.

The problem i see in this training is not the speed, but the kind of exits could be a problem. They only have real windows in the advanced training, not easily availible to normal people.

Was that some sort of project for your 'Intergral Safety' study?

nah... just for fun. <img src="/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I'm thinking of doing a north sea survival training in the summer. Don't mind to have some company, will PM you tomorrow about that.

Ditching an aircraft, fixed or rotary wing, is a very dangerous operation. I was a Naval Flight Officer in the early 70’s and part of our training was a water ditch aircraft evacuation exercise known as the Dilbert Dunker. A simulated fixed wing cockpit that ‘flipped’ on impact to place the student upside down in the water. The speed, at the time, seemed fast but actually was only a speed of the dunker as it slid down an incline from a height of about 20 feet. The device was in an enclosed pool with safety divers in the water and in every exercise the divers pulled a student out of the dunker.

Now – real world, rotary wing ditching in high seas in the dark with a load of people and you are not next to an exit – your chances of getting out are, as we used to say, the square root of zilch (zilch being the square root of crap). You may be injured or perhaps only had the crap beat out of you from the impact, you will be disoriented as those big blades over your head have a tremendous amount of torque which violently twist the aircraft around – I have seen a film of a helicopter doing a 270 degree turn after impact and rolling upside down – quick – which way is up, down, where is the exit, etc.? What if you are now in some other location in the cabin and others are piled on top of you? Do you have a flashlight, is it operable, where is it, is it a L head (US military style) mounted on your PFD so you can turn it on and work hands free?

Have you planned for the day you ditch? Are you a passenger in the aircraft waiting to be delivered to a destination or are you continually eyeballing everything, your seatmates, the cargo if any, the background noise – does it sound ‘normal’, is the crew paying attention or do they have their heads up their butts, are you continually updating your personal evacuation plan in the event the SHTF? Have you run through dozens of scenarios so that you know what you would do in various circumstances without having to sit there in an emergency and make that decision? Have you actually practiced your evacuation in the gear you normally wear in the aircraft? Would you recognize your location in the aircraft if it came to rest upside down? Is this the first time you have done this or is it a ‘routine’ procedure – remember, Complacency Kills.

The purpose of any training is to provide you with the basics and then you build upon the basics. To answer the question, it is too dangerous to increase the speed of the ‘impact’. After all, they are in the business of training you, not killing you. Just my thoughts….

Just found the following video of a “training accident”. Helicopter water landing, training mission, daylight, relatively calm seas (i.e., 3-4 feet), visibility excellent. Note what happened when the rotors hit the water, the speed, violence and resultant helicopter attitude in the water. One fatality, three injuries.

www.ogrish.com/archives/russian_helicopter_crashes_one_killed_May_11_2006.html


Note also, the helicopter seems to have been put down hard in the water. This was an amphibious model Hind. It appears the hull integrity may have been breached and it took on water which resulted in an overload condition and the pilot appears to have been trying to “fly it out” of the water. As with most aircraft accidents, most often it is the cumulative effect of many little mistakes that result in the loss of an aircraft. This may be a classic example.