I'm all for a change in bail out modelling. Remember guys - little things, are what really makes the difference.
....
Some people don't take dying or crashing seriously, but other people like me enjoy the "role playing aspect" of the game. Okay - I don't really imagine that I'm in a war or something, but I do wish to fly and fight in the fashion how the real pilots fought, and every little detail helps the immersion.
The "feel" we get from a sim game can vary from "detailed" to "crude". How did IL2/FB earn so many enthusiasts in such a short time? Well, it's not the levelof graphics alone.
It's the moments like when you see the enemy plane's canopy going flying, and the enemy pilot crawling out and jumping to the void... or, when you see a fighter which caught fire on the hydraulics, but the flames dying out after a few minutes, indicating that the hydraulic fluid all burned up...
....
These small things don't really "accomplish" anything in the practical sense. But it does wonders for immersion. Simulation games really don't operate on pragmatism alone.
As for difficult bail outs? Well, some people do care whether they live through the engagement or not. If bail out conditions are limited, then the pilot actually has to make a choice to bail out while his plane still has at least minimal contol to set up a bail-out sequence (such as going inverted). It's a small thing, but it still gives a certain range of choice and thinking which adds to immersion.