you can't release a minimum viable product in aviation since any product defect will mean death.
Do you think the increasing popularity of whole-aircraft parachute systems (which I note is an option on the SD-1) will improve the situation? It's my impression the Cirrus gets away with being hard to recover from a spin by making parachute deployment the standard recovery procedure.
I think the whole parachute system affords the pilots, and in my case the family, a better assurance of safety. My fiancé has a fear of flying and the parachute does help qualm those fears a bit.
Side note, have you ever tried to put a cirrus into a spin? It's difficult, iv'e tried. I think that has more to do with Cirrus passing the regulation than anything else.
The only thing I've flown is a hang glider, but I have some interest in aviation and I read a bit about the things I might be able to afford some day. I find these especially appealing: http://velocityaircraft.com
I've read that the Cirrus is designed to resist spins by essentially having the outer third or so of the wings, where the ailerons are fly at a lower angle of attack. I've also read a couple reports online by pilots claiming they didn't have much trouble getting a Cirrus to spin intentionally. In online discussions about the Cirrus, I saw it claimed that very few pilots successfully recover from accidental spins, so designing an aircraft to resist spins and including instructions to use the parachute strikes me as very reasonable.
Do you think the increasing popularity of whole-aircraft parachute systems (which I note is an option on the SD-1) will improve the situation? It's my impression the Cirrus gets away with being hard to recover from a spin by making parachute deployment the standard recovery procedure.