Yes, in that they would pay the agreed value for the plane if it were, as I
assume it would be, totalled. But I wouldn't expect to be covered by them
or anyone else in a replacement.
"John R. Copeland" wrote in message
...
Once(!) is right.
Will your insurance company buy you a replacement SR-22 after you pop that
chute?
Especially if you had to use it because of ice?
---JRC---

"Dan Thompson" wrote in message
gy.com...
The nice thing about a Cirrus is also you could always (i.e., once) pop
the
chute if the TKS couldn't keep up. I would think this would be comforting
when choosing to fly through a what was believed to be little known ice
that
the TKS system should be able to easily handle, just in case you found it
is
was more ice than anyone would have expected and you ran out of other
options. I think the TKS/chute combo would allow a lot of flights that
would keep me on the ground otherwise.

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"ET" wrote in message
...
My father owns SR-22, it has an anti-icing system (sprays solution out
from
micro holes in the wings/prop/etc)... I am not yet a pilot, so I'm
certain
I don't understand all the complexities of this, but would an SR-22
with
this system still be as limited as your statement suggests??

Even when certified for flight into known icing, light planes are simply
no
match for real icing conditions. Anti-ice or de-ice equipment is useful
for
buying yourself more time in which to leave the icing conditions (climb,
descend, turn around) but they don't come close to matching the
all-weather
capabilities of airliners.

Heck, even the smaller airliners (turboprops) can easily get out of
their
depth.

The installation on your father's SR-22 is simply an escape route. It
doesn't provide him with anything near all-weather capabilities with
respect
to icing.

Pete