"ISLIP" wrote in message
...

I suspect the same reluctance to progress is at work here. One can
speculate
that of the previous fatal VFR to IMC Cirrus accidents, lives MAY have
been
saved if the chute had been deployed. Skip the arguement that Cirrus chute

Everyone agrees that a chute is a great idea in case of strutural failure.
Most would agree it is a good idea for engine failure at night or over
mountains. There would likely be debate regarding whether it is a good idea
with an engine failure while VFR/VMC over the midwest. There would likely
be even more debate regarding whether using the BRS is a good idea in a
partial panel situation (noting also that the definition of partial panel
depends on whether this is a PFD airplane or a steam-gauge airplane).

But VFR into IMC is another story. First, given an appropriate weather
briefing this should not occur. Second, if this does occur then the pilot
should have enough emergency training to do a 180 in IMC and turn back to
VFR conditions. Does it make sense to total a perfectly functioning
airplane because the pilot did not know how to continue flying it in the
situation he got into? In fact, is it not possible that the BRS will result
in a landing into power lines or on an interstate highway or somewhere else
which will result in pilot injury, whereas a 180 back to VFR might result
in no injury and no damage?


--------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com