Bailing out or Ditching at Sea: Which was Safer?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Conslaw

Senior Airman
627
449
Jan 22, 2009
Indianapolis, Indiana USA
Are any of you aware of any statistics or analysis about whether it was safer to bail out or ditch at sea during WWII? I imagine that it might have varied with the aircraft and location. For example, the B-24 was known to have some especially bad characteristics when ditched, but still, is there a general rule with exceptions? How did the various services approach the issue? How common were flotation chambers in WWII aircraft?
 
From Spitfire XIV & XIX Pilots Notes...

1559938713602.png

1559938738774.png
 
During the Battle of Britain the RAF instructed pilots not to chase the LW back over the channel. Even if you came down in sight of land your chances of being rescued alive were slim. In a single engine aircraft ditching in the sea it can sink in seconds if indeed it holds together at all, if you are strapped in you don't have time to release the straps if you are not strapped in you are not capable of getting out. Catapult launched hurricane pilots used to parachute out when their mission was over rather than ditching. An ex forum member here, the late Bill Runnels described how he used an early type of what we would call a floatation chamber in training for his service in the B-17 I believe by the time he passed out of training it was compulsory in the USA.
 
In his article "There's Always a Way" for American magazine in January 1945, CMoH recipient Jay Zeamer Jr. had this to say about bailing out versus crashing in general, with a comment at the end about ditching:

"My crew and I would rather ride a plane down for a crash landing than bail out, unless the situation were [sic] absolutely hopeless. In every instance I knew about in the Southwest Pacific when a crew stuck together and rode their plane down, they made out better than when crews bailed.

"In one case, two Martin B-26s were lost together above a jungle in heavy weather.* The crew of one bailed. The crew of the other, piloted by Bob Hatch, my old first pilot, chose to take their plane down. They made a belly landing in a clearing at 100 miles an hour. No one was hurt. They stuck together in the jungle and found their way back to Port Moresby within a month. The crew that bailed all got separated in the process and came straggling in, gaunt and emaciated, for the next six months.

"Crash landings at sea are a mean operation, but if the crew is trained in 'ditching' a plane, they can usually all get out alive. The trick is for each man to brace himself in a good position for the crash and then know exactly what he must do the instant the plane stops in the water."

The incident Zeamer is referring to occurred on August 7, 1942, on a mission by the 19th BS/22nd BG out of Woodstock, Aust. When they ran into a thick overcast over New Guinea on their way to Port Moresby, the lead plane, piloted by Zeamer's good friend Walt Krell, and others flew underneath it and made their way safely to PM. Against Krell's advice, Hatch and Seffern flew over it, became lost, and eventually had to crash-land from lack of fuel.

(In a tragic twist of fate, both Hatch and Seffern were killed the following January when, as pilot and copilot, their B-26, with a double crew on board en route back to Australia for a rest, crashed on take-off from 14-Mile Strip. Apparently one of them accidentally retracted the flaps instead of the landing gear and the plane settled before Hatch could make it to 12-Mile, and nosedived into the trees.)
 
FWIW, B-29 crews tended to ditch rather than jump. (Part of the reason was keeping the crew together.) In researching Whirlwind I found stats showing just about 50% recovery of downed aircrews after the army & navy established a joint ASR effort based on Iwo. It was somewhat less previously.
 
My father, a co-pilot on a Whitley bomber, was part of a crew of five who had to ditch in the North Sea in November 1941. They all survived the ditching and clambered aboard the inflated dinghy. I don't believe they were in a position to, but had they bailed out none would have survived in the conditions. As it was, three days in the dinghy in wintry conditions took its toll and my father was the only survivor to be rescued by a German seaplane. Had it been summer with better weather all five crew members may well have survived the ditching. I believe their chances of survival, even in summer, would have been considerably slimmer had they bailed.
 
I remember seeing films of test ditching in one of the TV specials about Flight 19, proving how fast an aircraft sinks when ditching. The show had a film clip of an F-6F ditching, it sank in seconds. The crew looked like they needed to react very fast to get out.
 
I remember seeing films of test ditching in one of the TV specials about Flight 19, proving how fast an aircraft sinks when ditching. The show had a film clip of an F-6F ditching, it sank in seconds. The crew looked like they needed to react very fast to get out.
That's interesting, because USN aircraft were known for remaining afloat for a time where USAAF aircraft would sink like bricks.
There's a vintage film showing a TBF ditching near a destroyer and it remained afloat long enough for the pilot and rear gunner to help the bombardier out of the lower section and onto the wing to wait for rescue.
 
Here's a video of a Hellcat. In about 40 seconds its underwater, but its hard to tell if it was edited. I can imagine if you had any kind of injury, getting out of the cockpit in 40 seconds would be a challenge. This is not the video I remember from the film about Flight 19

 
Not sure if there is a difference in ditching with landing gear down or landing gear UP.

I would think up is better to prevent flipping the plane onto its back rather abruptly (could get injured easily in that event).

Even today airlines teach a gear up water landing should it become necessary.

Cheers,
Biff
 
Not sure if the landing might break or bend wing parts/compartments causing them to fill faster?

If radiator air scoops can screw up ditching than the landing gear on most fighters is really going to screw things up.

I have not read the Mustang Flight Manual on ditching, however it was behind the gear and smaller which would cause a smaller forward or flipping movement in my opine. I think the Mustang manual states not to ditch but am not sure if it was structural due to belly radiator or some other reason.

Bill?

Cheers,
Biff
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back