All interesting opinions. I'm a little suprised people see this as such a cut and dried decision, as we are talking about crash landings which by their nature must be fairly unpredictable. And we are then talking about a crash landing where the TM is disabled, but the passenger is able and needs to get out fairly quickly.
Maybe the BPA's approach takes into account that we all have to wear helmets, which may affect the chances of the TM becoming disabled, and we all carry hook knives, which may make it easier to get out of seat belts etc.
One thing i like about the BPA is that they tend to be very cautious about changing things that work unless there is a good reason to. Apart from the Australian incident mentioned previously, has there been other incidents where the situation was made worse by the student and TM being attached during takeoff?
One thing i have found unusual at some (USPA) DZ's is seeing how they load the bigger aircraft, especially tailgates like Skyvans. I've seen the students on one side of the plane (with seatbelts), and the TM's 6feet away on the other, and they stay that way until just before exit. To me, that looks the worst of both worlds. If you crash land after takeoff, the TM won't be in a position to help the student (assuming they are able to). And if you have a problem above exit altitude, you've got to get over to the student before you can hook them up and get out. Not saying this is wrong, as these people have more experience than i have, just curious what people think?