you'll find that the post upon which you're commenting wasn't made in reply to your statement, but that of IO540.
I set out details of some of the spin trials conducted before your post. I dont mind if you wish to comment selectively, but that is not the way a discussion usually works.
Again, contrary to his assertion that as there is no evidence the aircraft will not recover from a spin, I again offer that there is no evidence that it will.
How do you define a spin? Are you talking about a fully established spin, are you talking about a complete rotation, what are you talking about?
Where do you consider the certification process for the Cirrus departs from other light aircraft NOT certified for spinning?
Are you asserting that the work done on the Cirrus falls short of other GA aircraft NOT certified for spinning?
I am seeking to establish whether it is your contention that there is clear evidence a Cirrus is any more or less proven in its ability to recover from a spin than any other NON spin certified light aircraft, so we are clear on what it is we are discussing.