NASA has gotten interested. I suspect because of a certain thread on a European aviation forum:
Why airlines hate squished bugs on airplane wings
0.5% fuel savings, or $240 million dollars.
Speeds not typical for a GA environment, but nevertheless interesting.
Then again these two must really be praising da chute:
http://www.khou.com/story/news/local/2015/07/07/small-plane-lands-on-n-harris-county-roadway/29818145/
lenthamen wrote:
… not be worth the money?
Depends on the money and the weight! 
A gazillion pilots have flown and fly without “CAPS” every day.
Why are we talking CAPS in this topic by the way?
LeSving wrote:
Cirrus Airframe Aerodynamic Lifting System ?
Well it’s not that their marketing department tries to convince possible customers that Cirrus is introducing all those features into aviation. If you examine this further, you will find out that they did very little “firsts” – but they have an economically successful marketing and obviously picked a good list of items to integrate into a product.
To return to the original question: there has been much emphasis on the wing, however the whole airframe gets cleaned and polished, including prop, antennae etc. Maybe the dead insects on the prop have a different effect than those on the wing?
It gets washed every few months and gets a polish annually, and it definitely goes faster after the polish. Perhaps people who notice no difference have very clean aircraft in the first place!
CAPS is a system developed by Cirrus & BRS together and is not in all details identical to other BRS systems. So why should they not give it their own name? Since CAPS is very important for the Marketing of the Aircraft it is unerstandable that they did that. It is also: unimportant :-)
I’m sure the plane will fly a lot slower with CAPS deployed 
Why can’t the just call it BRS? What do they call the wings? Cirrus Airframe Aerodynamic Lifting System ?
(Don’t start it, please :-) I have so much work today … :-))
All information about CAPS can be found here:
https://www.cirruspilots.org/copa/safety_programs/w/safety_pages/723.cirrus-caps-history.aspx
Michael wrote:
IMHO: The CAPS is not worth the cost nor the weight, period.
That’s an interesting statement! Why would an escape for situations like:
- engine failure at night or over terrain
- structural failure
- loss of control
- Pilot Incapacitation
- Midair collision
… not be worth the money?
I have flown these Lancairs: 360, ES, IV-P, Columbia 300 and 400, Legacy. Maybe 30 hours altogether. The visibility cannot be compared, nor can you compare the cabin.
I really liked the 400 though!
Well, 100 surviving pilost have a very different opinion about CAPS. But let’s not get into that. It’s a tiring discussion and I really have enough of that.
Want to compare all data of the SR22T G5 and the TTx?
Of course you will win that race! I know the Coumbia is faster than the SR22. But that’s about the only advantage it has.
