Of course not, its high risk, likely to damage the aircraft.
I suppose that is my main point, if it is likely to damage the aircraft it is likely in a a percentage of cases to damage (or kill) the occupants and the higher the landing speed the higher the damage potential.
Do pilots practice ballistic chute pulls?, of course not, they just simulate them
In a simulator yes and I was amazed how realistic it was and for me was a turning point on my own personal SOP
Me neither, I also would not trust an instructor, with the blinkered view that a chute pull was always the best alternative, which your post implies
My own SOP for any off airport situation needing to land is that I will always use the the chute, this decision is made before I take off. This is something I receive a reasonable amount of criticism for, mainly from the non Church of Cirrus community, However as a result of these forums and further thought I have modified this now and if the ground wind is likely to be 35+ knots on the ground then I will consider a landing into wind due to the risk of the chute dragging the plane along the ground.
Oh and some of us used to teach down to 5ft with the inherent risk that occurs with such low go arounds. There is a real risk that a PFL might turn into a real one when you do this so the field has to be good for it. The risk in my book was worth it because all my students were then equipped to the best of my ability for the unlikely event it ever happens to them. Until you get the student down into the ground rush phase of PFL's with fences flying towards wheels a PFL down to 500ft agl is a pretty academic exercise.
MJ Out of interest does current PPL training allow down to 5ft if the instructor chooses or has the sylabus changed?
Let me ask a question, Hypothetically if you were in a Cirrus and had 100 random unexpected forced landing, lets say in Southern England so reasonable terrain and lets also say in perfect VFR weather, How many do you think you and your passengers would walk away unscathed?