"Robert Henry" wrote
My experience with ABS is that most people are neither TRAINED properly, nor
do they take the time to understand how it works, to use ABS correctly (when
needed and when not). The situation concerning insurance discounts is not a
function of more aggressive driving, imho.

You may well be right. However, it's a distinction without a
difference. The effect is the same - the safety advantage fails to
materialize because of the human element, even though there's nothing
wrong with the technology.

I would further argue that this
is currently the issue facing the chute on the Cirrus - there is no way
(AFAIK) to train on the proper use of the system, both in terms of function
and in the decisionmaking process, that fully demonstrates the experience of
what will occur leading up to deployment and through the outcome to its
inevitable conclusion.

Right. And therefore it doesn't really matter whether the cause is
being more agressive or just not understanding the system - either
way, the safety gain will fail to materialize.

Something very similar occurs in privately owned twins. The
transition training available is generally grossly inadequate. You
don't want to know how little multiengine experience the average
practicing multiengine instructor actually has. Decent simulators are
generally not available. As a result, the safety advantage of the
second engine generally fails to materialize.

In fact, all the safety advantages - ABS, chute, second engine - are
real. However, they are LIMITED. There are things they WILL do for
you, there are things they WON'T do for you, and they are never free -
they all have downsides.

Michael