I do but this account has come to my attention a couple of times by now and I'm considering pinging a higher power.
"Better to use the extinguishers as extra thrust for a wing suit." does not read like something a reasonable person would inject as a contribution to the conversation.
...Legally speaking, that would not be the case, as you're giving the prosecution ammo for proving premeditation.
Someone who actually just had something happen to them probably would not be carrying two fire extinguishers that they suddenly had an epiphany and realized they could use as a thrust source.
Our legal system is absolutely perfect for ensuring that "cool" will almost always get couched as "reckless and wanton disregard". This does however, push the calculus in favor of, "if you're going to do it, get the most out of it".
I too would assume that a plane would typically crash (significantly) further away than the distance that you can typically travel in a parachute, unless it was put in a straight nosedive.
Which is something one can't guarantee from outside the plane.
Also, it's much easier to ensure a safe crash site when you're only doing the calculations in one axis, which a nose down, straight in trajectory would have offered.
