EchoBeach
not at all the Cirrus is a fabulous plane and the BRS a superb addition to safety
The Cirrus would be my choice of a personal aircraft and the proven BRS is part of that choice.
But those statistics make sobering reading not for the saves the BRS has made but the sort of needless accidents that has resulted in the BRS being used.
A pilot has to fly within his and the aircrafts limits and a lot of those accidents indicate pilots who are not up to it being in conditions which they are not adequately able and lack the skills to deal with.
Basic stalls on autopilot (perfectly recoverable)
frozen pitot (perfectly rectifiable without use of the chute and many many other examples.
There is without doubt accidents where the chute has lured pilots into conditions where maybe they would not be in without the BRS.
I would not be comfortable in a single at night yet I would regard the BRS as a sort of second engine on a twin so would fly at night.
that is an example of how the BRS can lure you to fly in conditions where you might think twice in a conventional aircraft.
Anything which is new and different will attract scrutiny and the cirrus fills that criteria the fact that it defies conventional recovery techniques will also attract scrutiny and we all had a long discussion on when and where to pull the chute in engine failure.
So nothing against the aircraft or the BRS but we do need to look at problems which that extra safety brings in overconfidence with ones abilities and which then creates situations where the BRS is needed when it should NOT be needed.
Jonzarno quotes pilot error but some of these accidents are more than pilot error as such but are accidents waiting to happen.
As another example: ferry pilots regularly bet their lives on a SEP getting them across the Atlantic (I think you may even have done that yourself?).
Jonzarno piston twin and jets yes
singles ??? I am not that brave
i don't trust piston engines that much through experience especially just one piston engine.
Pace