OPITO
SCOPITOExits 15.12.2006
Page 21 of 30
Needs to be more realistic. Window seals. Door to operate. Suggestion to block an exit so that delegate must escape through a different exit.
Water section needs to be longer. Less people i.e. 16 in pool. Too many in water session [16]. Longer time would be helpful to raise confidence.
Halve no. of delegates. More time with apparatus. More dunks. Would benefit from smaller class size.
Maybe lights out, wave machine, sea conditions. Some way for individuals to experience being turned upside down in some smaller
equipment to get over apprehension without having to try and get out of the HUET simulator.
Have smaller groups i.e. 8 at a time not 16, split to give more time to get to know equipment.
It can be seen that a number of comments called for training to be made more realistic by the inclusion of exits. The other common theme related to smaller group sizes.
5.3 TRAINING GOOD PRACTICE
Whilst observing the HUET training and talking to delegates and training staff a number of other issues were noted that could be regarded as good training practise.
1. Instruction during wetshallow water training with a staff to student ratio of 1 to 4
reduced the likelihood of peer pressure and allowed training staff to give more individual attention to the needs of each delegate. The likelihood of an individual
admitting problems within a group size of 8 or more is low, particularly if this action was likely to hold up the training of others who were anxious to complete the course
as quickly as possible.
2. In some cases, the competence of delegates using EBS was assessed on a 1:1
basis allowing the member of staff to assess, not only whether the delegate was completing the required actions in the correct order and manner, but also allowing
them to assess the confidence of each individual when using the equipment. This practice would allow staff to fast-track individuals who found the equipment easy
and simple to use, and give those having problems more time to gain confidence as well as competence.
3. Time spent completing initial wetshallow-water training allowed delegates to
practice using the equipment EBS in this case, gain confidence and overcome problems and fears. This appeared to reduce the impact of the exercises
undertaken in the helicopter simulator.
4. There are two options for completing the HUET exercises. The first is to take each
group usually 4 delegates through all the exercises, before moving on to the next group. This practice may involve a long wait for the last group. The preferred option
is to split the HUET exercises so that each group completes the surface evacuation and partial submersion exercises before then moving on to the capsize exercises.
This also gives delegates a short break and may be important when 7 exercises are being considered for BOSIET training.
These practices could be applied to HUET training that includes the operation of exits. Delegates should be given the opportunity to become familiar with the operation of exits,
and in particular the operation of push-out windows before undertaking the capsize exercises in the helicopter simulator. This represents a further example of part-task
OPITO
SCOPITOExits 15.12.2006
Page 22 of 30
training. It is considered that delegates could be given the opportunity to operate a push- out window in a controlled environment, either using a window mock-up in shallow water
or using a window within the simulator. This could be undertaken whilst using EBS, allowing the delegate time to overcome any fears about their ability to remove a push-out
window. One of the other issues raised during the consultation process related to cross-cabin
exercises and escape from seats that are not located next to a window. Underwater escape exercises of this type have been undertaken in the past and were generally
stopped for safety reasons. In this case exercises were undertaken with more than 4 delegates, meaning that some had to hold their breath and wait for the person next to the
exit to escape before they could escape. Some minor injuries occurred. In recent years it is much more common for each delegate to be placed next to an exit. One of the training
providers consulted during the survey reported problems conducting multiple cross-cabin egress exercises with windows but no EBS. Two delegates suffered from water ingestion.
The exercise is now optional. The representative from the training organisation considered that it was difficult to control the risks with this type of exercise. It is therefore
suggested that if cross-cabin exercises are to be considered, they should be carried out with a small number of delegates in the HUET, with only one delegate leaving by each
window and no crossed escape routes.
5.4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TRAINING WITH EXITS
