View Single Post
  #7  
Old April 12th 04, 01:47 AM
Richard Kaplan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...

airframe wouldn't have been a total loss. Generally, when the BRS is
deployed, the net loss to an insurance company should be LESS, not more,


It depends how it is deployed. Suppose a Cirrus pilot panicks in VFR on top
of an overcast an pulls the chute when he could have done a successful ASR
approach or VFR weather were within range?

Add to that the savings in medical expenses or death liability, and I

can't
imagine that having a BRS installed would ever wind up creating an

airplane
that's not a viable insurance risk.


Hull insurance is more expensive than liability insurance for a Cirrus (and
just about all airplanes worth $150K+), so I do not think the medical
expenses or death liability are much of a factor.

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

www.flyimc.com