http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bs-md-chesapeake-plane-crash-20111029,0,4955538,print.story

or

http://bsun.md/sg8vd8

So sad. From the article:

"Back at the airstrip, another pilot was getting into a plane and wearing a yellow inflatable life preserver with a light attached to it.

"I thought it looked cute," recalled Lanny, who was flying without life preservers; he did not think the width of the bay demanded it.

If I could invent a "stylish" PFD, I wonder how many lives I could save.

Sad indeed. He wouldn't fly his military aircraft without proper equipment, why his personal one?

I have a stylish PFD/survival vest -- Modular Aircrew Vest. The attached pouches carry a couple flashlights, chemical lights, a marine hand-held VHF radio, a PLB and other good gear. Most importantly though, it will keep you breathing air.

IMO the new Switlik X-Back is plenty stylish and is supposedly very comfortable.

Even something as small as a signal mirror might have made a difference.

RIP, Mary.

HJ

Another sad case that may have had a positive out had the minimum responsible level of gear been carried. RIP, Mary. I feel terrible for the son and the woman who helped maintain the airplane.

Harrowing account. I spent a lot of time on the Bay this year - in boats. Gives me the heebie-jeebies to think about trying to swim that far, injured, after a plane crash.

With or without a life jacket.

No lifejackets or signalling and flying over water? What a boneheaded pilot !

RIP Mary.

Not really, just another pilot suffering from itcan'thappentome-itis. This is a very common affliction in aviation. Over the years I have lost enough friends that I realized it can happen. The vest I have far exceeds FAA requirements for that specific aircraft.

When I fly, most flights are over water. Any flight over water can result in an unplanned water entry. That's just the way it is. Stuff happens and some stuff is outside the aircrew's sphere of influence/control.

I partly agree, Rus. Some stuff was out of his control? Yes. All? No. He thought she could swim that far? In ideal conditions and perfect health, nevermind after an accident? Maybe, but wearing lifejackets or not flying over water is clearly something that's within the influence of the flight crew.

I'm not trying to bash him. He's going to have to live with that misjudgement.

Maybe "bonheaded"ness isn't the same as "itcan'thappentome-itis" but "They", who keep making these life endangering decisions, frustrate me. (Or non-decisions, as the case may be.)

Out of curiosity, do pilots - Military or civil - have to learn any survival skills to get/maintain their licences?

Losing an engine as happened here is one of those things that could be written off as outside the pilot's control. Being the owner and probably maintainer, mechanical issues would be in his control on the ground, but not once he's flying. What would be in his control is the safety equipment and survival gear on the aircraft. With his prior Air Force experience, he should have known better.

No survival training or aptitude beyond flying the aircraft to minimum FAA standards and certain regulatory book knowledge is required to maintain your license.

Edit: Maintaining a medical as well.

Also, every 2 years you have to get signed off by either an instructor, inspector, examiner, or obtain an additional pilot rating of some sort that requires a checkride.

I know Navy and AF pilots/crew members undergo extensive survival training. I assume the Army has similar requirements.

I went through basic survival in NE Washington (Fairchild AFB/Spokane) and spent several days in the field. Water survival at Homestead AFB, FL. We also had refresher requirements, mostly academic, not in the field.

Don't think civilian pilots receive training, but can't say for sure since I got my flight training through the AF and my FAA license was after taking test on civil regulations.

However, I'm fairly certain in the regs it mentions that you are not supposed to fly beyond gliding distance of land without a life presever. Haven't looked it up, so can't give the exact reg.

Nope, not for Part 91 (non-commercial)light aircraft operations in the U.S. Entirely up to the pilot or aircraft operator.

You're right the gliding distance is a 135 (Air Taxi) reg, and for 91 you only need them when flying further than 50nm from shore in a large(12,500 lbs +) or turbine powered airplane.

Edit: Of course I think staying within gliding distance is a great idea when you don't have proper flotation equipment, but with the low weather it may not have been possible that day.