RobertL18C wrote:
“If the engine quits in instrument conditions (blind flying when you can’t see the ground) or at night, the pilot should pull the control column full aft (it won’t stall) and keep the wings level. The leading-edge slats will snap out at about 40mph (64km/h), and when the airplane slows to a forward speed of about 25mph [40km/h], the airplane will sink at about a parachute descent rate until the aircraft hits the ground.”
I’ve actually tried that in the AN2 down to about 300 ft before going around (engine in idle). It works well, but one needs to really make an effort to keep the wings level until both side slats are out. Thereafter the airplane will descend in a manner where impact with terra firma has a very large chance of walking away from and in many cases even the airframe might be useable again. In this configuration, forward impact speed will be less than 40 km/h. The AN2 is the one airplane which does not actually need a CAPS as it does carry it’s own parashute so to speak from it’s very aerodynamics. I have always considered the Antonov 2 a masterpiece of engineering and aerodynamics. If I ever would have the spare cash to own and fly one, I definitly would. Apart, my wife would appreciate the baggage space 
Yet that maneuver is not really something a pax could (nor would) do. Until you get the hang of it, it is quite freaky and outright scary. In order to achieve the proper attitude, you will need to approach the speed where the slats will extend with care, simply jerking back the controls will cause some rather interesting pitch up and actually WILL stall if this is done too fast or out of a fast speed (as much as that actually happens on the AN2). So while it is one reason why the AN2 is one SEP which can be reasonably safely flown in IMC and night with a real “out” if the engine quits, it is not a plane which can easily be flown by someone not trained on it, particularly not that maneuver.
Re Vodka rations: I have to deny that Vodka is an approved alternate fuel for the AN2, nor for its pilots 
Re the Pinch Hitter course: I think this is one of the most useful things you can do with someone who flies with you regularly. I understand from some people who have done it that quite a few have actually continued to their PPL after their first go with the PH. I have been planning to get my wife to do it and am not thinking of setting this up once I start retraining for my IR. What I have heard is that even if you are an FI it is NOT a good idea to do this yourself. People who are too close are often not really suited to take instruction off each other.
What I think the PH will do in addition to be a safety factor is that it will give the flying companion a chance to learn more about the operation of the airplane and about what is going on. This in turn will make the actual flying experience far more interesting as they can start to interact with you rather than just sit there bored all the way. In addition, if they are anxious, being busy might reduce the anxiety as well.
Something I am really apprehensive about is what Peter relates. If a partner who at first has no problems flying with me all of a sudden starts to become anxious I would really wonder how to deal with that and moreover wonde what has caused it. I say that because I can see it with my wife too to some extent, even though she is all right if she comes along and she will come along, but gets really worried if I am on my own. One more reason why I want her to do the PH.
IIRC, AOPA in the US used to do a pinch-hitter course (the usual scenario was pilot and spouse, spouse was basically brought up to pretty much a first solo). From what I heard quite a lot of pinch hitter course takers ended up liking it and getting their private anyway.
Great outcome! I just listened to the audio of that event and I find it hard to believe the pax had absolutely no experience. A phrase like ‘descending through eightyonehundred’ isn’t really what someone who had never been in an airplane would use. Unfortunately (for us, that is), the final vectoring was done over the phone, so no audio available. Apparently one of the controllers is a CFI and talked the guy down. Still, the approach and landing were flown extremely well, kudos!
In any case, this spurred my GF to want to learn more about flying, so a good outcome all around!
The problem with check lists like this is that they tend to grow, and before you know it you have a full PPL course.
My wife, a passenger who doesn’t like turns and gets extremely nervous at the first bump of turbulence, decided that if she was going to fly with me, she would not have the headsets on and would either sleep or read a book.
I keep my passenger briefing short, because she listens less to them than most passengers listen to the safety briefing given by cabin crew on an airline.
As far as me teaching or demonstrating anything, it’s in one ear and out the other and usually ends up in a row. I would like to teach her how to set up the radio and use the autopilot. I tried teaching her to drive once, it didn’t end well.First time out she decided to swerve into an Aston Martin, fortunately I was able to avoid the crash. But that was it and over to a professional instructor.
She passed her test first time something she always reminds me of. It took a 2nd attempt for me.
I would, however, demonstrate how to use the parachute, if I had one.
She has agreed that some day she would like to do a pinch hitters course, as they used to be called in USA and UK. But always keeps putting it off or finds excuses.
Press it and she’s more likely to refuse to fly than to take the course.😀
But I would like to know how many pilots have become incapacitated in flight. My sense is, not many, but we do only hear of the ones that are landed successfully by a passenger.
If there are many, one has to wonder on the effectiveness of aviation medicals.
My answer would be a panic button in every aircraft. Press it and First Officer Alexa takes over. Calls ATS, sets 7700, and possibly sets the autopilot to nav and tells it where to go for the nearest suitable airfield. Most aircraft will do a pretty good job of landing on their own if set up correctly. If obstacles can be avoided, many hard landings are survivable, at least for the POB. Not necessarily the aircraft, but is that important?
How hard could it be with just a touch of AI.?
gallois wrote:
How hard could it be with just a touch of AI.?
That is pretty much what Garmin’s autoland does. And yes, that would be a very good thing to have on just about every airplane which is either SP or used for passenger transport, recalling the Helios disaster….
gallois wrote:
She has agreed that some day she would like to do a pinch hitters course, as they used to be called in USA and UK.
Just get it done without her having much chance to refuse. Get her to fly with a CFI you trust and maybe she knows from afar. And stay away from the airplane!
There are a lot of such initiatives, also in the US such as the “Right seat forward” courses by Jolie Lucas and Jan Maxwell which have this goal.
Also nowadays, you can do some of this in a simulator if you got a good one. But ONLY with a skilled instructor.
gallois wrote:
But that was it and over to a professional instructor.
In 99% of cases that is the way to go. It is very rare that spouses will accept tuition by their significant other. Not only on the subject of driving or flying, but in general. I know there are cases where it did work, but they are few and far between.
172driver wrote:
I find it hard to believe the pax had absolutely no experience. A phrase like ‘descending through eightyonehundred’ isn’t really what someone who had never been in an airplane would use
He may have sim experience or he may have watches lots of youtube and picked up the phrases. VAS aviation or similar.
Some people simply are naturals. I would not be surprised if he goes for a PPL now, if coached properly. I think the guy who landed the King Air a few years ago did get rated later on.
I gather with something like GTN+GFC700, one could get a pax to press 7 buttons to select an RNP, set 40%+/-10% power and manage the last bit of the flare, the problem is having a big runway nearby, in Florida it’s hard to land on something that is not an airport with four 3km cross-runways
I still think PAX here has flown GA before (likely his granddad or uncle Bonanza), it’s not that uncommon in US
Ibra wrote:
one could get a pax to press 7 buttons to select an RNP, set 40%+/-10% power and manage the last bit of the flare, the problem is having a big runway nearby, in Florida it’s hard to land on something that is not an airport with four 3km cross-runways
7 buttons is 6 too many for most in such a situation. There is no replacement for training.
It has helped of course that today you only need a medical before your checkride and no more “lerners license” to be able to train, which used to be a massive stumbling block and limiting PH courses to 5 hours. Nowadays it is perfectly possible in Europe to train anyone properly to be able to execute a reasonably safe landing. I always felt it was a good thing to involve frequent pax, spouses in particular, as much as legally possible. Not only does it make flying more interesting for them, it is a definite safety improvement in case of pilot incapacitation.
I recall that following the Helios debacle there was talk of familiarizing interested FA’s with basic cockpit skills and getting those who show aptitude into a sim program to a point where they could get any airliner they are rated on to perform an autoland or getting it onto the ground in a survivable shape. Nothing much came out of it, but I still find the idea excellent, even if it will cause some cost and additional planning.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
I recall that following the Helios debacle there was talk of familiarizing interested FA’s with basic cockpit skills and getting those who show aptitude into a sim program to a point where they could get any airliner they are rated on to perform an autoland or getting it onto the ground in a survivable shape. Nothing much came out of it, but I still find the idea excellent, even if it w
They should rather change the rules for locking the cockpit. The purser had a CPL and with assistance from ground he would most likely have been able to bring the aircraft down on a runway in one piece. As it was he had to break down the cockpit door and when he finally got in it was too late.
