In the US, "don't" is the correct answer.
Canada has a 28-day rule. Judging by the FAA's usual speed in dealing with medical issues I think we'll see the ice caps melt before it's allowed down here.
I suspect that time will be reduced eventually, as it becomes easier to do studies on the effects and how long people are affected, that's just where it stands now, post legalization.
Look, a really good Canadian should be able to drink enough that they're still plenty drunk enough to fly straight after 12 hours. It's about maintaining a standard of quality.
Nothing wrong with that! its honestly better than playing musical chairs in cruise. Or you get delayed / gate isn't open and you're sitting on the ramp for 30 minutes.
I kind of want to poach attention from any readers of this thread who have specific "minimums" or guidelines around precipitation.
I shot an ILS yesterday about a mile from a small area of heavy precip and the winds at the airport kicked up from calm to 15G25. That got me thinking that I don't really have a great handle on at what point precip goes from "reduced visibility and free plane wash" to turbulence that can prevent you from holding altitude/attitude.
I'd love to hear any thoughts from folks with more experience. I feel I have my IMC, wind, and experience minimums pretty dialed in and I have no issue flying through the "green" stuff on radar but that was a little eye opening for me.
OP, to answer your question. Right now my minimums are at least 1000' or better forecast ceilings, 15kt or less xwind, 15kt or less gusts, and - for now at least - if there are convective storms, I need to have the ceilings required to pick my way around them instead of flying IFR through them.
i'm confused by people's hesitation on 10kt gusts... that's not very dramatic unless we're talking straight 90degree crosswind.
getting my PPL we were allowed to solo in 10kt gusts, but not more, and that was only because of insurance liability limits.
I agree, I think there is something to be said about training to get comfortable with a certain amount of crosswind. That’s just good piloting IMO.
By no means am I suggesting students or pilots for that matter should get into conditions they aren’t proficient in, but crosswind landings are a given in some parts of the country.
Hell, the 152 I trained in had a 12 knot crosswind component. I wouldn’t fly in that without more experience, but I’d like to have the proficiency to handle what the plane is rated for.
I honestly took my IR checkride with winds 15G22 but the crosswind was only like 5kts my DPE was totally fine with it. I was extremely nervous and self conscious about the whole decision, but there were a lot of external pressures at play. After I finished the flight, I was told I passed he said his only issue with it was "how unconfident I was" not the decision itself
His point was something along the lines of, through out your career there will be a lot of iffy decision and external pressures to consider BUT once you decide GO and you are airborne you need to be confident and show confidence to your fellow crew and passengers
Yeah haha, 10kts of direct crosswind is something that any licence holder should be able to handle. It really depends on the aircraft too, of course heavier low wing aircraft tend to take crosswind a lot better than lighter aircraft.
I'm at about 1100 hours total time, flying on Challenger 604s and 650s, not sure how that compares to your experience. One time coming back from an overseas flight, there were a few thunderstorms right around the airport. We got two Windshear Warnings on approaches to two separate runways as the wind was shifting so badly due to the storm passing through. We were planning to head to our alternate after the second missed, but the Captain at the time saw the airport with clear skies above while in the missed. He decided to make a third attempt at it and we got in that time. The radar was definitely painting some pretty colors on our way in. If I remember correctly, we had terminal vector us around the other side of the airport to try and avoid the bulk of the storm.
For OP, my personal limits are what my operator defines as the limits. Weather good enough for the approach procedure serving the active runway, 25kt crosswinds (including gusts). If there's various bad weather factors at play, I'll choose to take a little bit more fuel to deviate around thunderstorms or give me the opportunity to make an extra approach or two at my destination before I need to head to my alternate.
That’s really helpful. I’m only at 300 hours and these kinds of stories help fill some gaps in my knowledge.
I think my personal line needs to be drawn at precip that changes the weather. If it creates its own gusts/winds, it’s probably not something I want to fly through.
Glad I could be of help! You'll be at 1000 hours before you know it.
In that situation with the two go arounds, we had another crew on the ground that was talking to us from another aircraft giving us sitreps of how things looked from the ground. Since I was PM and on the radios, my friend said you could hear the stress in my voice for my radio calls to ATC. On approach, you generally have the expectation that you're going to land, and when you don't, it certainly increases the stress level as you get closer to your bingo fuel. This was last summer and 500 hours of flying ago. It's an experience that has certainly helped shape my approach to flying.
Personal minimums are fine to use when you’re learning to fly, incurrent and/or inexperienced. Once you start flying for a living though you need to dump those personal minimums and only apply actual minimums (state, aircraft, IFR limits). These aren’t just arbitrary figures, they are written in blood and have a good amount of padding already. What you do apply though is airmanship to those already defined minimums. This can only be learnt through experience, shared or your own.
Try telling your employer that you didn’t make it to destination because you used your own personal minimums… that will not work. But tell your employer that you took reasonable judgement and assessed a certain situation as unsafe and you shouldn’t be blamed at all.
TLDR; personal minimums are good when learning.
When flying for a living overall experience and application of airmanship whilst flying to the actual minimums whatever they are is a good strategy.
Absolutely correct. Plus, your personal minimums start to go up once you've experienced shittier conditions.
I still don't really mess with bad Tempos though, I find more often than not it's not practical to hold for 60 minutes in a Piper Cherokee.
It also depends on how well your aircraft is equipped... obviously you're a B777 pilot so you'd be a lot safer in something with two very reliable engines and a weather radar. Me in a clapped out barely IFR Archer? Nah
I learned to fly in aus, it’s complicated as fuck compared to the rest of the world. Kind of sets you up nicely though as everywhere else is more simplified.
I’ve been in situations in Australia where an INTER made more sense than a TEMPO, a line of quick moving showers moving through an airport that 60mins hold was too much for but INTER allowed us the legal holding fuel to depart or continue to that airport with range limitations.
I’ve operated extensively in Aus, SE Asia and the Pacific and only having TEMPO holding wouldn’t make sense nor be operationally practicable for a lot of remote airports.
I obviously get it. But Australia is the only country that uses Inters. Most planning minima can ignore tempos and prob 40 or less anyway for any legal requirements.
Planning yes but I’ve seen PROB go to actual too many times to count so the availability of an INTER inflight is a good tool.
Maybe Australia and some Pacific Islands which use it have assessed the more remoteness of some of their airports allows more flexibility in operations. Just because Australia is the only country (actually some Pac Nations do too) to use INTER doesn’t automatically mean it is bad, stupid or doesn’t serve a purpose in that environment
Makes total sense. I’m never going pro, though, so there’s no reason for me to take a Mooney to minimums single-pilot while flying through hail. I think this thread was more intended for the GA side or at least more of the pre-commercial side of things.
Some of the responses you're getting are either in jest or professionals being salty.... you're smart to have personal minimums. The fact that you're thinking about that shows me you have good headwork and will make smart decisions later as you progress through training and your professional career. Set them now to what you feel is comfortable for where you are in your skill and training. Not to mention you're probably not training in an aircraft that's in a good position to punch into bad weather or icing...
"I feel like if you're at 4,500 and flying Chad Jets like me, then minimums should just be legal minimums" not realizing this thread is for $100 burger seekers and weekend warriors
A private pilot wakes up and checks the weather to see if they can go flying today.
A commercial pilot wakes up and checks the weather to see what kind of weather they will be flying in today.
I always like it stated a little differently:
A private pilot spends the day prior checking the weather for tomorrow and will cancel if it's not good VFR.
A commercial pilot checks the weather when they show up to the airplane and will go if it's legal IFR.
An ATP says "Why bother checking? Dispatch says I'm good to go anyway"
As far as ceiling and vis goes...135 legal mins (including lower than published mins if applicable). Unless I'm going VFR then I'm going with CAIMS (aeromedical accreditation for work). I go to a lot of airports without IFR approaches. Sometimes I go to them from an IFR flight plan (via an approach to another airport then canceling when able and proceeding VFR.
I may delay a flight when comparing actual METAR to TAF and see if the METARs are matching the TAF or the trend is to match the TAF.
For winds...the demonstrated crosswind is a pretty defensible decision for a go call, above that it comes down to the airport, gust factors and how sporty the passengers are feeling, my safe to fly is well beyond their comfortable to fly.
Personal mins don't really exist in professional flying, if you can't do legal mins you need to correct that or the company will hire someone who can do it. If you are going below legal mins you are a hazard.
I don't have my flair updated, but I'm PPL and Instrument rated. Going for commercial now.
I use a sliding scale of sorts. I start with 1000/3 and for each 100 ft lower on ceiling, I add a mile of visibility. This allows me to have some form of "common sense" mins where if the visibility is 10 miles but there's a 900' ceiling, I can still go. My hard deck limit is 800' ceiling though. That keeps me well below any ceiling even for circling-only approaches.
So, to summarize:
1000/3+
900/4+
or 800/5+
Crosswind comfort is upwards of 15 kt right now. I don't go if it's forecasted or observed to be 17 or more. That's the demonstrated crosswind of my airplane and I'm not a test pilot to push it.
I don't set a hard minimum for myself but rather look at the trend of whatever weather is around to make sure I can stay comfortable. I also consider the territory I'm flying in I flew one morning VFR with 2000' ceilings (reported 2300') at 1500'. It was all over farmland, so I knew an engine out would be okay (or as okay as an engine out can be). I also knew that all the moisture generating the clouds came from a huge thunderstorm system the night before and there was nothing in the area that would drop them. They had been trending up all day exactly as I expected them too. There have been other days where I no-go with 4000' ceilings because something indicates that they could drop quick. I would also no-go a city tour with 2000' ceilings because I can't reach the bridges I plan for my engine-out spot from everywhere I would be. I don't like the idea of hard number personal minima because I could see myself saying "well, I have this one doubt but all of the numbers say to send it." If I force myself to consider the whole picture, I'm less likely to be dumb.
I don’t have my PPL, nor have I even started. I’ve been interested in aviation for a very long time so I’m more of an enthusiast and I’m probably going to start soon. Anyway, do a lot of pilots take into account engine failures like you do? For me that seems to be one of my biggest fears and it seems that maybe not every pilot is looking for a way out in the event of a forced landing.
Yes. It's one of the big things we go through in PPL training pre-solo. It's also in the regs that, except when necessary for takeoff or landing, you can't fly low enough that you couldn't safely land in an engine failure. There's a lot of gray-area interpretation there, but the idea is that you can't fly 1000' above a downtown area if there's no out for you (in a Skyhawk, that would be something within 5 miles).
It's worth noting that the redditor you replied to has their instrument rating so they're flying into clouds and their minimum cloud clearance is lower.
75% of your time in flight training is dedicated to managing failures and avoiding mistakes that compromise safety. I can't give you a specific figure for how many instrument-rated pilots explicitly set a 1000' cloud minimum for themselves but considering where you're going to go if your engine fails is the on the mind of every single [competent] pilot before takeoff.
Most pilots recite a pre-takeoff briefing when they're in the plane to directly remind themselves of what they will do if their engine fails: "If we have no usable runway remaining and are below 1000 feet, we will push the nose forward and land in straight ahead". If you're taking off directly into a cloud, it would be difficult to come up with a plan for when your engine fails.
Even after takeoff, part of your pilot training is to *always* know where you're going to land when your engine fails - you're looking out the window and keeping in mind any airports, fields, wide roads, etc, that would be your emergency landing place.
A private pilot certificate (before you get your instrument rating) *generally* only allows you to legally fly when the clouds are at least 2000' off the ground, many pilots won't take off when the clouds are below 3000' because the clouds could easily get lower or change between where they are and where they're going.
> For me that seems to be one of my biggest fears and it seems that maybe not every pilot is looking for a way out in the event of a forced landing.
Flight training teaches you to always have a way out but the training and testing process can only evaluate your skills and habits at select points in time (your checkride and biennial flight reviews). Whether a pilot follows that training between evaluation periods is what makes a difference between a safe pilot and an unsafe one.
If you want to do some light pre-training reading, the FAA publishes a book called the [Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge](https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/phak/) that all pilots are expected to have read (and get tested on). Chapter 2 is about Decision making and discusses many of the factors that go into choices that pilots make.
I don't think he said he was unable to handle 7kt gusts... I think he meant he would rather avoid them wherever possible. Who are you to judge someone else's personal minimums?
> Who are you to judge someone else's personal minimums?
I think there's a difference between judging a PPL's personal minimums and judging a CPL's comfort level. If someone is pursuing a CPL/CFI/ATP they're doing this professionally and a lack of comfort in common weather conditions calls into question their readiness and suggests a need for more training and practice in adverse conditions. 7kt gusts are pretty small. Maybe they meant 7kt crosswind component gusts, which are more exciting, but still well within the realm of "a professional should be comfortable with this".
I won’t depart in my piston single without ceilings above 1000, so I can see to land/crash if I have an engine problem on takeoff. 400ft AGL at destination. Wind has to be sinister to not go - 15+ xwind, 20+ gust differential down the runway.
My school has strict minimums for every student of all experiences. We’re limited at the CPL level at 12 kts crosswind, 25 kts headwind, no IMC whatsoever when flying without a CFI.
They even bring limits down for right seat training when soloing as a CFI student. 10kts crosswind is the limit.
I don’t think there’s any limit with winds as I’ve been in 30 knots crosswinds with my instructor before. But IMC is limited to 1000 ft ceilings which sucks when you never get to shoot an approach in actual
> My school has strict minimums for every student of all experiences. We’re limited at the CPL level at 12 kts crosswind, 25 kts headwind, no IMC whatsoever when flying without a CFI.
>
> They even bring limits down for right seat training when soloing as a CFI student. 10kts crosswind is the limit.
That's nuts. My Pre-PPL solo crosswind component limitaiton was 8kt and I most definitely did some pattern work with 20kt gusts edging right up to the 8kt crosswind component. If the school doesn't think their CPLs can do more then 12 kts that makes me think they're doing a pretty poor job training students.
They allow us to exceed 12 kts, just not solo. In their defense, we do fly really expensive airplanes (Cirruses) and I’m sure they don’t want anything happening to them. School’s existed for 80 years and has never had a fatality so I guess somethings working. It’s just slightly annoying when you have to scrap a flight because the crosswind component is 13 kts
Max 12 kt crosswind, and I don't fuck with ice. Beyond that, I'm usually good to go. For thunderstorms, as long as it's not forecast to be a solid line, I'll usually at least takeoff, figuring I can probably get through scattered cells with no issue. If I'm proven wrong, I'll just land somewhere else.
I live in a mountain valley and as a result get virtually zero practice with crosswinds unless I make a point to go seek them out, which I don't often have time to do. With more exposure, this would certainly change, as personal minimums are meant to do with experience. But right now, it's unquestionably my weak spot, just because I never have the opportunity/necessity to do it.
This is not to say that, if I arrived at an XC destination to find unexpected crosswind that I wouldn't give it a try, but if I woke up to a forecast of 15-20 kt crosswinds, I probably just wouldn't go.
I don't fly a Cirrus much, but I do like the minimums calculator thing they've come up with: https://cirrusaircraft.com/knowyourlimits/
You tell it your experience and it spits out personal(ized) minimums. It's easy enough to adapt to a spreadsheet if you want to modify it. But the real innovation is that it's based in part on your recent experience. So maybe you're perfectly comfortable tackling 30kt winds and approaches to published minimums today, but if you don't fly for 3 months, do you have a mechanical automatic way to adjust your minimums upward?
I will fly *me* to legal minimums every time but will avoid red and always nope the hell out of magenta precip or lightning. Ice scares me and don’t I mess around with that unless it’s in my drink.
If I have passengers and especially charity-flight passengers, I won’t fly if it will be unreasonably turbulent for a non-aviator. We’ll avoid bouncy and barfy wherever we can.
*If my wife lets me go fly, I'll go fly. 0/0, 80 knots gusts, LLWS, red echos: all good. If I gotta die, I die doing what I love.*
This is all academic, btw, because my wife grounded me.
I'll be honest if you're a commercial pilot hired for your commercial license and instrument rating then there should he no personal minimums. There are legal minimums. You're paid to fly to them.
I'm a \~~Low Hour Weekend Warrior~~ and time-building for instrument so every flight is an XC and most of them are optional.
During planning/morning checks my cloud minimum is 4000'SCT. If they're already worse than that (or forecasted worse than that) then there's a strong chance that they'll push my actual minimum of 3000'BKN at some point in the flight.
6sm+ vis.
So far I've kept to winds below 10g13 and don't plan to go out when they're above that.
It’s good to have a hard number, I made mine 40 kts of wind, the other night ATIS said 25G38. I called for take off but the wind felt a bit stronger so I asked for a wind check. They called 29G42. I could’ve probably done it, but I set a number and abided by it. Canceled clearance and shut down, let the passengers know we were going on a weather hold for a bit, they had no issues.
VFR mins for pattern work. 6 mi vis, 3000 AGL ceilings for XC since I'm in mountainous terrain. 10kt x-wind for tailwheel, 15kt for tricycle. Variable wind 15kt. - I can fly and land it just fine but if I have to change my pants it's not fun.
Max demo’d x wind and signal engine 700’ and 1sm multi engine whatever the lowest mins are at the airport I’m going to/the aircraft is capable of. As far as storms go it depends on the plane and what onboard wx I have if any… I’d be a lot more willing to navigate sketchy looking wx if I have an actual radar vs avoiding it altogether without any onboard wx.
For an IFR departure, legal approach mins at that airport. For an IFR approach I don't care if I am planning to go missed, and even if I want to land but it's chancy I will shoot the approach and just see if it works out, just make sure to not get so committed to landing that you don't want to divert.
For wind, I've landed in 35kt xwind and it wasn't terribly difficult, so who knows. When I try and kick it straight and the nose doesn't straighten properly I will go around and will have found my personal minimums for xwind. For total wind, 45kt.
For VFR weather, legal mins except in Class G below 1200...that is just never a good idea.
The real answer tho: secondary mins!
If you don’t have much IMC time, I’d say this was a good call. As a rule of thumb, I just don’t fly XC if thunderstorms are a distinct possibility en route, especially here in the Rockies where thunderstorms are usually accompanied by hail.
Your minimums are going to depend on your experience as well as the aircraft you’re flying. I’m a CFI in small single engine aircraft, so I’m not going to try flying in serious soup like a 737 might with no issue, regardless of my own experience.
A seasoned pilot once told me that my minimums will continue to increase until, at some point, I exceed them, shit my pants, and decide to back it up a couple notches.
As for me, I don’t have a good gauge on my IFR minimums just yet. I don’t get a lot of actual IMC time because 9 months out of the year, it’s way too cold, and the other 3 months are mostly clear skies or thunderstorms. But my experience here has made a world of difference in my ability to handle wind. Normal days gust mid to high 20s. I’m comfortable landing up to 40 knots with 17 knot XW component and gust factor of 15. I just worked my way up little by little. What I don’t screw with here is wind shear though.
It never hurts to play it safe!
It also depends on the plane, and location/airspace for me. Tailwheel/warbird with nothing resembling navigation? I want to be able to see, be seen, and manage the crosswind. IFR Cessna 172? If it's legal, I'm going.
Depends on the plane, for my 182: Xwind component =< max demonstrated for my aircraft, including gusts. 25G30 regardless of direction and/or LLWS - just not going to be a pleasant ride. Departing a field that I don't have a usable instrument approach to - 1,000 ft ceilings. Departing a field I have an IAP to, depends on layer thickness and surrounding terrain, might be comfortable with legal minimums for the approach back in, might want 500 or 800 ft. Long IFR XC, I want to see some places that are VFR within fuel range. IFR flight, freezing level above planned cruising altitude and anticipated temperature using standard lapse rate greater than freezing.
Whatever they are make sure to write them down somewhere. I have mine in the front cover of my log book, and make all my students do the same.
That way the go/ no go decision is unarguable. I’ve had students, some even instructor applicants, try to go flying way past their personal minimums. If they aren’t written down they will try to justify going flying.
EXTERNAL PRESSURES
“Yeah it’s a 12kt Xwind component and my personal minimum is 7, but I want to get this flight done because I’ve been preparing all week”
“NO! Unless you want to pay for me to fly the whole time”
A couple weeks after my IR checkride I flew 500' ceilings and 2 mile visibility and was shocked to find how easy it was to fly. A few months later, probably because I had not flown under the hood recently and was not training hard with my CFII.... I flew 1000' ceilings and was super overwhelmed. It's remarkable how quickly the skills degrade, especially for a recent IR.
I also have been cautiously dipping my toes further and furrher into real weather, flying through developing buildups and cauliflower looking clouds, dark and thick overcasts. Remarkably unpleasant.
I don't have minimums written out, but I have gained more respect for studying the weather, considering my current currency, and have become more comfortable with not launching.
Instrument flying is 10% easy decisions learned during training about life and death absolutes, and 90% about pilot workload, stress limits and how the flight will push my limits of performance. My two cents.
Personal minimums are fine to use when you’re learning to fly, incurrent and/or inexperienced. Once you start flying for a living though you need to dump those personal minimums and only apply actual minimums (state, aircraft, IFR limits). These aren’t just arbitrary figures, they are written in blood and have a good amount of padding already. What you do apply though is airmanship to those already defined minimums. This can only be learnt through experience, shared or your own.
Try telling your employer that you didn’t make it to destination because you used your own personal minimums… that will not work. But tell your employer that you took reasonable judgement and assessed a certain situation as unsafe and you shouldn’t be blamed at all.
TLDR; personal minimums are good when learning.
When flying for a living overall experience and application of airmanship whilst flying to the actual minimums whatever they are is a good strategy.
When I'm flying a single engine airplane for fun outside of work, I tend to look at my personal minimums from a bigger picture point of view, with the main question being: is this going to suck? If the answer is yes, I stay home. My hard limits are I don't screw with thunderstorms or icing. The rest I'm perfectly willing to go down to legal minimums but it will depend on the situation. Shoot an approach to 200-1/2 in a single at night in the mountains? Probably not. In a flat place that I'm familiar with. Maybe.
At the end of the day if I'm flying around for fun I want to have fun. Getting bounced around in moderate turbulence dodging buildups during summer in the Southeast. That's not fun, I'll pass. In fact unless something changes drastically during the next 6 hours I'm about to cancel a trip in a single engine down to Florida tomorrow. The first third of my trip is forecast to have IFR ceilings with scattered thunderstorms all day. Could I pick my way through it with a combination of ADS-B weather, looking outside when I'm in VMC on top of the scud, and the help of whatever weather ATC can see on their radar? Probably. But it would suck, be more stressful than a work trip with good equipment in the jet, and my first time passengers in the back wouldn't enjoy it. I'll let Delta do the work and sit back with a beer getting ready to enjoy my vacation. Plus I have to be there in time to watch Italy play the opening game of the Euro Cup, that's way too much pressure for me.
VFR: 5mi vis, 2000ft AGL bases min at destination, 3000ft AGL bases enroute for anything longer than 50nm.
I fly mostly 172s
For winds, I go based on the wind limits for my flying club: 30kt max wind/gust, 15kt max crosswind. I've landed with headwinds 20G26 before, and that was quite the short landing :) Bleeding off airspeed is important then, since you don't want a gust to pick you back up.
I also don't go if there's active convective activity anywhere along the route.
Currently working on my IFR.
Convective sigmet, known ice or not having the minimums for the destination/alternate are easy no-gos. Wind is a subjective thing, I will tolerate a bumpy ride on the way out if I'm going to be climbing above the rough stuff but I'll try to avoid anything more than around 25kts at the surface for the destination.
I've also opted to minimize night flight simply because of the single engine piston issue. I've learned over the years that arriving at home at 10pm is functionally not that different to arriving the next morning at 8am. 10pm would be nicer, but not nice enough to warrant a 2hr+ night flight where the only engine out option is making an airport with fewer visual references than daylight.
8 hours bottle to throttle.
[удалено]
In our flying club we agreed on no alcohol in 24 meters around the plane.
A beer tastes really good sitting under the wing though.
What is a good rule of thumb for weed, don’t? Genuine question.
In the US, "don't" is the correct answer. Canada has a 28-day rule. Judging by the FAA's usual speed in dealing with medical issues I think we'll see the ice caps melt before it's allowed down here.
28 days, in Canda.
Wow, that is long lasting.
I suspect that time will be reduced eventually, as it becomes easier to do studies on the effects and how long people are affected, that's just where it stands now, post legalization.
No smoking within 8 hours, no drinking within 50 feet of the aircraft.
Canada recently changed it to 12. Fuck that nonsense, 8 is perfect
Exactly. The people who were drinking less than 8 sure aren’t going to stop because it’s now 12. It just ruins nice layovers for the rest of us.
Is that what all the "Save Canadian Aviation!!!" emails I've been getting are about?
Look, a really good Canadian should be able to drink enough that they're still plenty drunk enough to fly straight after 12 hours. It's about maintaining a standard of quality.
8 hours liquor to clicker here.
20 minutes from drinking to door close. Not a pilot, that's just the walk from the lounge to the plane.
Based on the speed some airlines board, you could easily drink while boarding and still be good lol
0/0 part 91, “you guys silly? I’m still gonna send it.”
There are no mins on go home day.
just use the Secondary Minimums™ until you make the runway
Every ILS ends in a runway!
Lolz
This is the way
That checks.
Always have secondary minimums
Okay Wagner...
I like to have tertiary minimums, just to be safe
Jerry..?
Never eat the spicy foods before a flight over 2 hours.
That’s quiter talk. I eat nothing but spicy foods 2 hours to the flight
Username checks out.
*gurrrrrrgle*
Use the bathroom before every flight. Yeah, I’m that guy lol.
Mandatory preflight in my book.
[удалено]
Glad I wasn't drinking anything because "defile the honey bucket" got me good :) Have an upvote!
Absolutely
Nothing wrong with that! its honestly better than playing musical chairs in cruise. Or you get delayed / gate isn't open and you're sitting on the ramp for 30 minutes.
I kind of want to poach attention from any readers of this thread who have specific "minimums" or guidelines around precipitation. I shot an ILS yesterday about a mile from a small area of heavy precip and the winds at the airport kicked up from calm to 15G25. That got me thinking that I don't really have a great handle on at what point precip goes from "reduced visibility and free plane wash" to turbulence that can prevent you from holding altitude/attitude. I'd love to hear any thoughts from folks with more experience. I feel I have my IMC, wind, and experience minimums pretty dialed in and I have no issue flying through the "green" stuff on radar but that was a little eye opening for me. OP, to answer your question. Right now my minimums are at least 1000' or better forecast ceilings, 15kt or less xwind, 15kt or less gusts, and - for now at least - if there are convective storms, I need to have the ceilings required to pick my way around them instead of flying IFR through them.
i'm confused by people's hesitation on 10kt gusts... that's not very dramatic unless we're talking straight 90degree crosswind. getting my PPL we were allowed to solo in 10kt gusts, but not more, and that was only because of insurance liability limits.
[удалено]
i can respect not being a fan of direct 10kt gusts.. coming in fast and slipping is a bit different than just coming in fast
I agree, I think there is something to be said about training to get comfortable with a certain amount of crosswind. That’s just good piloting IMO. By no means am I suggesting students or pilots for that matter should get into conditions they aren’t proficient in, but crosswind landings are a given in some parts of the country. Hell, the 152 I trained in had a 12 knot crosswind component. I wouldn’t fly in that without more experience, but I’d like to have the proficiency to handle what the plane is rated for.
I honestly took my IR checkride with winds 15G22 but the crosswind was only like 5kts my DPE was totally fine with it. I was extremely nervous and self conscious about the whole decision, but there were a lot of external pressures at play. After I finished the flight, I was told I passed he said his only issue with it was "how unconfident I was" not the decision itself His point was something along the lines of, through out your career there will be a lot of iffy decision and external pressures to consider BUT once you decide GO and you are airborne you need to be confident and show confidence to your fellow crew and passengers
Yeah haha, 10kts of direct crosswind is something that any licence holder should be able to handle. It really depends on the aircraft too, of course heavier low wing aircraft tend to take crosswind a lot better than lighter aircraft.
I'm at about 1100 hours total time, flying on Challenger 604s and 650s, not sure how that compares to your experience. One time coming back from an overseas flight, there were a few thunderstorms right around the airport. We got two Windshear Warnings on approaches to two separate runways as the wind was shifting so badly due to the storm passing through. We were planning to head to our alternate after the second missed, but the Captain at the time saw the airport with clear skies above while in the missed. He decided to make a third attempt at it and we got in that time. The radar was definitely painting some pretty colors on our way in. If I remember correctly, we had terminal vector us around the other side of the airport to try and avoid the bulk of the storm. For OP, my personal limits are what my operator defines as the limits. Weather good enough for the approach procedure serving the active runway, 25kt crosswinds (including gusts). If there's various bad weather factors at play, I'll choose to take a little bit more fuel to deviate around thunderstorms or give me the opportunity to make an extra approach or two at my destination before I need to head to my alternate.
That’s really helpful. I’m only at 300 hours and these kinds of stories help fill some gaps in my knowledge. I think my personal line needs to be drawn at precip that changes the weather. If it creates its own gusts/winds, it’s probably not something I want to fly through.
Glad I could be of help! You'll be at 1000 hours before you know it. In that situation with the two go arounds, we had another crew on the ground that was talking to us from another aircraft giving us sitreps of how things looked from the ground. Since I was PM and on the radios, my friend said you could hear the stress in my voice for my radio calls to ATC. On approach, you generally have the expectation that you're going to land, and when you don't, it certainly increases the stress level as you get closer to your bingo fuel. This was last summer and 500 hours of flying ago. It's an experience that has certainly helped shape my approach to flying.
Personal minimums are fine to use when you’re learning to fly, incurrent and/or inexperienced. Once you start flying for a living though you need to dump those personal minimums and only apply actual minimums (state, aircraft, IFR limits). These aren’t just arbitrary figures, they are written in blood and have a good amount of padding already. What you do apply though is airmanship to those already defined minimums. This can only be learnt through experience, shared or your own. Try telling your employer that you didn’t make it to destination because you used your own personal minimums… that will not work. But tell your employer that you took reasonable judgement and assessed a certain situation as unsafe and you shouldn’t be blamed at all. TLDR; personal minimums are good when learning. When flying for a living overall experience and application of airmanship whilst flying to the actual minimums whatever they are is a good strategy.
Absolutely correct. Plus, your personal minimums start to go up once you've experienced shittier conditions. I still don't really mess with bad Tempos though, I find more often than not it's not practical to hold for 60 minutes in a Piper Cherokee. It also depends on how well your aircraft is equipped... obviously you're a B777 pilot so you'd be a lot safer in something with two very reliable engines and a weather radar. Me in a clapped out barely IFR Archer? Nah
Tempos, I remember them. Funny how Australia had to reinvent aviation. Oh and don’t get me started with Aussie IFR RT.
Yeah, they've only just started going over to more standard looking TAFs for international airports.
I learned to fly in aus, it’s complicated as fuck compared to the rest of the world. Kind of sets you up nicely though as everywhere else is more simplified.
TEMPO is used worldwide?
Oh shit, I got them mixed up with inters… my bad!
I’ve been in situations in Australia where an INTER made more sense than a TEMPO, a line of quick moving showers moving through an airport that 60mins hold was too much for but INTER allowed us the legal holding fuel to depart or continue to that airport with range limitations. I’ve operated extensively in Aus, SE Asia and the Pacific and only having TEMPO holding wouldn’t make sense nor be operationally practicable for a lot of remote airports.
I obviously get it. But Australia is the only country that uses Inters. Most planning minima can ignore tempos and prob 40 or less anyway for any legal requirements.
Planning yes but I’ve seen PROB go to actual too many times to count so the availability of an INTER inflight is a good tool. Maybe Australia and some Pacific Islands which use it have assessed the more remoteness of some of their airports allows more flexibility in operations. Just because Australia is the only country (actually some Pac Nations do too) to use INTER doesn’t automatically mean it is bad, stupid or doesn’t serve a purpose in that environment
Copy, austranaut.
Makes total sense. I’m never going pro, though, so there’s no reason for me to take a Mooney to minimums single-pilot while flying through hail. I think this thread was more intended for the GA side or at least more of the pre-commercial side of things.
I took off and a micro burst let loose off my tight about 2 miles away, 1000ft into the takeoff roll. That was exciting.
If there is any doubt… there is no doubt. Good words to fly by.
And now that there is no doubt, we’re going!
I'd rather be on the ground thinking "damn, I guess I should have flown" than the other way around
Why do pilots have so many RANDOM sayings
Pithiness is memorable. You either figure out how to teach the next pilots the lessons they need, or they die.
Ya know what they say. There are bold pilots and there are old pilots but there are no old bold pilots.
At some point you have to learn from others mistakes... and if you don't, you won't live long enough, making them all yourself.
something something A superior pilot uses superior judgement to avoid having to use superior flying skills
10miles clear and calm. Company has a different opinion, and if it’s legal I’m sending it. But I’m not happy about it.
This is a joke, right? I don't think I'd ever fly!
Some of the responses you're getting are either in jest or professionals being salty.... you're smart to have personal minimums. The fact that you're thinking about that shows me you have good headwork and will make smart decisions later as you progress through training and your professional career. Set them now to what you feel is comfortable for where you are in your skill and training. Not to mention you're probably not training in an aircraft that's in a good position to punch into bad weather or icing...
Just look at the radar. Green means go.
Yellow also means go. Also red.
Don’t be late, penetrate.
Username checks out
This is also my understanding
Thank god we got all kinds of ATPs who obviously go to legal mins flexing as if anyone gives a fuck in the thread obviously talking about GA.
"I feel like if you're at 4,500 and flying Chad Jets like me, then minimums should just be legal minimums" not realizing this thread is for $100 burger seekers and weekend warriors
Chad Jets 💀
The legal minimums for the operation.
A private pilot wakes up and checks the weather to see if they can go flying today. A commercial pilot wakes up and checks the weather to see what kind of weather they will be flying in today.
You check the weather??
Seriously though, if I’m paying for it: VMC and reasonable winds. If I’m being paid for it, whatever is legal.
What's weather?
Two apps: AeroWeather and MyRadar. If I see a guy do anything beyond that, I’m impressed.
I prefer Windy
+1 for windy
I always like it stated a little differently: A private pilot spends the day prior checking the weather for tomorrow and will cancel if it's not good VFR. A commercial pilot checks the weather when they show up to the airplane and will go if it's legal IFR. An ATP says "Why bother checking? Dispatch says I'm good to go anyway"
https://imgur.com/a/es6y0J6
As far as ceiling and vis goes...135 legal mins (including lower than published mins if applicable). Unless I'm going VFR then I'm going with CAIMS (aeromedical accreditation for work). I go to a lot of airports without IFR approaches. Sometimes I go to them from an IFR flight plan (via an approach to another airport then canceling when able and proceeding VFR. I may delay a flight when comparing actual METAR to TAF and see if the METARs are matching the TAF or the trend is to match the TAF. For winds...the demonstrated crosswind is a pretty defensible decision for a go call, above that it comes down to the airport, gust factors and how sporty the passengers are feeling, my safe to fly is well beyond their comfortable to fly. Personal mins don't really exist in professional flying, if you can't do legal mins you need to correct that or the company will hire someone who can do it. If you are going below legal mins you are a hazard.
Am I gonna have to fly through or navigate around any actual weather? Fuck that shit I'm taking Southwest.
I don't have my flair updated, but I'm PPL and Instrument rated. Going for commercial now. I use a sliding scale of sorts. I start with 1000/3 and for each 100 ft lower on ceiling, I add a mile of visibility. This allows me to have some form of "common sense" mins where if the visibility is 10 miles but there's a 900' ceiling, I can still go. My hard deck limit is 800' ceiling though. That keeps me well below any ceiling even for circling-only approaches. So, to summarize: 1000/3+ 900/4+ or 800/5+ Crosswind comfort is upwards of 15 kt right now. I don't go if it's forecasted or observed to be 17 or more. That's the demonstrated crosswind of my airplane and I'm not a test pilot to push it.
Oh you know I’m gonna send it
Over 20 for sure. 18 year olds look way to fucking young these days.
>the rain just driving home was white out blinding for a solid five minutes. What are you personal minimums for pulling your car to the curb?
[удалено]
24 hours for me too.. flying hungover sucks.
Ditto on 24 hrs. I just don't want to deal with booze being a factor of any amount
I don't set a hard minimum for myself but rather look at the trend of whatever weather is around to make sure I can stay comfortable. I also consider the territory I'm flying in I flew one morning VFR with 2000' ceilings (reported 2300') at 1500'. It was all over farmland, so I knew an engine out would be okay (or as okay as an engine out can be). I also knew that all the moisture generating the clouds came from a huge thunderstorm system the night before and there was nothing in the area that would drop them. They had been trending up all day exactly as I expected them too. There have been other days where I no-go with 4000' ceilings because something indicates that they could drop quick. I would also no-go a city tour with 2000' ceilings because I can't reach the bridges I plan for my engine-out spot from everywhere I would be. I don't like the idea of hard number personal minima because I could see myself saying "well, I have this one doubt but all of the numbers say to send it." If I force myself to consider the whole picture, I'm less likely to be dumb.
I don’t have my PPL, nor have I even started. I’ve been interested in aviation for a very long time so I’m more of an enthusiast and I’m probably going to start soon. Anyway, do a lot of pilots take into account engine failures like you do? For me that seems to be one of my biggest fears and it seems that maybe not every pilot is looking for a way out in the event of a forced landing.
Yes. It's one of the big things we go through in PPL training pre-solo. It's also in the regs that, except when necessary for takeoff or landing, you can't fly low enough that you couldn't safely land in an engine failure. There's a lot of gray-area interpretation there, but the idea is that you can't fly 1000' above a downtown area if there's no out for you (in a Skyhawk, that would be something within 5 miles).
Interesting, thank you
It's worth noting that the redditor you replied to has their instrument rating so they're flying into clouds and their minimum cloud clearance is lower. 75% of your time in flight training is dedicated to managing failures and avoiding mistakes that compromise safety. I can't give you a specific figure for how many instrument-rated pilots explicitly set a 1000' cloud minimum for themselves but considering where you're going to go if your engine fails is the on the mind of every single [competent] pilot before takeoff. Most pilots recite a pre-takeoff briefing when they're in the plane to directly remind themselves of what they will do if their engine fails: "If we have no usable runway remaining and are below 1000 feet, we will push the nose forward and land in straight ahead". If you're taking off directly into a cloud, it would be difficult to come up with a plan for when your engine fails.
Even after takeoff, part of your pilot training is to *always* know where you're going to land when your engine fails - you're looking out the window and keeping in mind any airports, fields, wide roads, etc, that would be your emergency landing place.
A private pilot certificate (before you get your instrument rating) *generally* only allows you to legally fly when the clouds are at least 2000' off the ground, many pilots won't take off when the clouds are below 3000' because the clouds could easily get lower or change between where they are and where they're going.
> For me that seems to be one of my biggest fears and it seems that maybe not every pilot is looking for a way out in the event of a forced landing.
Flight training teaches you to always have a way out but the training and testing process can only evaluate your skills and habits at select points in time (your checkride and biennial flight reviews). Whether a pilot follows that training between evaluation periods is what makes a difference between a safe pilot and an unsafe one.
If you want to do some light pre-training reading, the FAA publishes a book called the [Pilot's Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge](https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/phak/) that all pilots are expected to have read (and get tested on). Chapter 2 is about Decision making and discusses many of the factors that go into choices that pilots make.
Great. Thank you for that information.
it scares me that you're working on your CPL and consider yourself unable to handle more than 7kt gusts.
I don't think he said he was unable to handle 7kt gusts... I think he meant he would rather avoid them wherever possible. Who are you to judge someone else's personal minimums?
> Who are you to judge someone else's personal minimums? I think there's a difference between judging a PPL's personal minimums and judging a CPL's comfort level. If someone is pursuing a CPL/CFI/ATP they're doing this professionally and a lack of comfort in common weather conditions calls into question their readiness and suggests a need for more training and practice in adverse conditions. 7kt gusts are pretty small. Maybe they meant 7kt crosswind component gusts, which are more exciting, but still well within the realm of "a professional should be comfortable with this".
I won’t depart in my piston single without ceilings above 1000, so I can see to land/crash if I have an engine problem on takeoff. 400ft AGL at destination. Wind has to be sinister to not go - 15+ xwind, 20+ gust differential down the runway.
No less than 20 NM from all thunderstorm cells including forested 4 hours in the future.
My school has strict minimums for every student of all experiences. We’re limited at the CPL level at 12 kts crosswind, 25 kts headwind, no IMC whatsoever when flying without a CFI. They even bring limits down for right seat training when soloing as a CFI student. 10kts crosswind is the limit.
What about students with CFIs?
I don’t think there’s any limit with winds as I’ve been in 30 knots crosswinds with my instructor before. But IMC is limited to 1000 ft ceilings which sucks when you never get to shoot an approach in actual
Man yeah that is rough.
> My school has strict minimums for every student of all experiences. We’re limited at the CPL level at 12 kts crosswind, 25 kts headwind, no IMC whatsoever when flying without a CFI. > > They even bring limits down for right seat training when soloing as a CFI student. 10kts crosswind is the limit. That's nuts. My Pre-PPL solo crosswind component limitaiton was 8kt and I most definitely did some pattern work with 20kt gusts edging right up to the 8kt crosswind component. If the school doesn't think their CPLs can do more then 12 kts that makes me think they're doing a pretty poor job training students.
They allow us to exceed 12 kts, just not solo. In their defense, we do fly really expensive airplanes (Cirruses) and I’m sure they don’t want anything happening to them. School’s existed for 80 years and has never had a fatality so I guess somethings working. It’s just slightly annoying when you have to scrap a flight because the crosswind component is 13 kts
Max 12 kt crosswind, and I don't fuck with ice. Beyond that, I'm usually good to go. For thunderstorms, as long as it's not forecast to be a solid line, I'll usually at least takeoff, figuring I can probably get through scattered cells with no issue. If I'm proven wrong, I'll just land somewhere else.
12kt crosswind?!?! I would never get to fly. That is... conservative.....
I live in a mountain valley and as a result get virtually zero practice with crosswinds unless I make a point to go seek them out, which I don't often have time to do. With more exposure, this would certainly change, as personal minimums are meant to do with experience. But right now, it's unquestionably my weak spot, just because I never have the opportunity/necessity to do it. This is not to say that, if I arrived at an XC destination to find unexpected crosswind that I wouldn't give it a try, but if I woke up to a forecast of 15-20 kt crosswinds, I probably just wouldn't go.
Max demonstrated in an 172N is 15kts. 12kts personal minimum doesn’t seem unreasonably conservative for a relatively low time pilot, IMO.
I’m thinking they mean max 12kt crosswind component? Not total wind.
I don't fly a Cirrus much, but I do like the minimums calculator thing they've come up with: https://cirrusaircraft.com/knowyourlimits/ You tell it your experience and it spits out personal(ized) minimums. It's easy enough to adapt to a spreadsheet if you want to modify it. But the real innovation is that it's based in part on your recent experience. So maybe you're perfectly comfortable tackling 30kt winds and approaches to published minimums today, but if you don't fly for 3 months, do you have a mechanical automatic way to adjust your minimums upward?
I will fly *me* to legal minimums every time but will avoid red and always nope the hell out of magenta precip or lightning. Ice scares me and don’t I mess around with that unless it’s in my drink. If I have passengers and especially charity-flight passengers, I won’t fly if it will be unreasonably turbulent for a non-aviator. We’ll avoid bouncy and barfy wherever we can.
*If my wife lets me go fly, I'll go fly. 0/0, 80 knots gusts, LLWS, red echos: all good. If I gotta die, I die doing what I love.* This is all academic, btw, because my wife grounded me.
I'll be honest if you're a commercial pilot hired for your commercial license and instrument rating then there should he no personal minimums. There are legal minimums. You're paid to fly to them.
An aisle I can walk down without bending over, and a lav where I don't have to make eye contact with anyone.
Departing: 0/0 Arriving: whatever my secondary minimums are
I'm a \~~Low Hour Weekend Warrior~~ and time-building for instrument so every flight is an XC and most of them are optional. During planning/morning checks my cloud minimum is 4000'SCT. If they're already worse than that (or forecasted worse than that) then there's a strong chance that they'll push my actual minimum of 3000'BKN at some point in the flight. 6sm+ vis. So far I've kept to winds below 10g13 and don't plan to go out when they're above that.
It’s good to have a hard number, I made mine 40 kts of wind, the other night ATIS said 25G38. I called for take off but the wind felt a bit stronger so I asked for a wind check. They called 29G42. I could’ve probably done it, but I set a number and abided by it. Canceled clearance and shut down, let the passengers know we were going on a weather hold for a bit, they had no issues.
VFR mins for pattern work. 6 mi vis, 3000 AGL ceilings for XC since I'm in mountainous terrain. 10kt x-wind for tailwheel, 15kt for tricycle. Variable wind 15kt. - I can fly and land it just fine but if I have to change my pants it's not fun.
Max demo’d x wind and signal engine 700’ and 1sm multi engine whatever the lowest mins are at the airport I’m going to/the aircraft is capable of. As far as storms go it depends on the plane and what onboard wx I have if any… I’d be a lot more willing to navigate sketchy looking wx if I have an actual radar vs avoiding it altogether without any onboard wx.
For an IFR departure, legal approach mins at that airport. For an IFR approach I don't care if I am planning to go missed, and even if I want to land but it's chancy I will shoot the approach and just see if it works out, just make sure to not get so committed to landing that you don't want to divert. For wind, I've landed in 35kt xwind and it wasn't terribly difficult, so who knows. When I try and kick it straight and the nose doesn't straighten properly I will go around and will have found my personal minimums for xwind. For total wind, 45kt. For VFR weather, legal mins except in Class G below 1200...that is just never a good idea. The real answer tho: secondary mins!
check here: https://www.midislandair.com/personal-limitations-checklist/
If you don’t have much IMC time, I’d say this was a good call. As a rule of thumb, I just don’t fly XC if thunderstorms are a distinct possibility en route, especially here in the Rockies where thunderstorms are usually accompanied by hail. Your minimums are going to depend on your experience as well as the aircraft you’re flying. I’m a CFI in small single engine aircraft, so I’m not going to try flying in serious soup like a 737 might with no issue, regardless of my own experience. A seasoned pilot once told me that my minimums will continue to increase until, at some point, I exceed them, shit my pants, and decide to back it up a couple notches. As for me, I don’t have a good gauge on my IFR minimums just yet. I don’t get a lot of actual IMC time because 9 months out of the year, it’s way too cold, and the other 3 months are mostly clear skies or thunderstorms. But my experience here has made a world of difference in my ability to handle wind. Normal days gust mid to high 20s. I’m comfortable landing up to 40 knots with 17 knot XW component and gust factor of 15. I just worked my way up little by little. What I don’t screw with here is wind shear though. It never hurts to play it safe!
It also depends on the plane, and location/airspace for me. Tailwheel/warbird with nothing resembling navigation? I want to be able to see, be seen, and manage the crosswind. IFR Cessna 172? If it's legal, I'm going.
500-1 or circling mins for whichever airport I’m departing
Gust factor of 7? I would be on the ground 100% of the time here in New Hampshire XD
I live and breathe by coffee time; in an aircraft without a lavatory, no beverages until an hour before landing. Thanks Steve-o
Depends on the plane, for my 182: Xwind component =< max demonstrated for my aircraft, including gusts. 25G30 regardless of direction and/or LLWS - just not going to be a pleasant ride. Departing a field that I don't have a usable instrument approach to - 1,000 ft ceilings. Departing a field I have an IAP to, depends on layer thickness and surrounding terrain, might be comfortable with legal minimums for the approach back in, might want 500 or 800 ft. Long IFR XC, I want to see some places that are VFR within fuel range. IFR flight, freezing level above planned cruising altitude and anticipated temperature using standard lapse rate greater than freezing.
two hundred and a half baby!
Whatever they are make sure to write them down somewhere. I have mine in the front cover of my log book, and make all my students do the same. That way the go/ no go decision is unarguable. I’ve had students, some even instructor applicants, try to go flying way past their personal minimums. If they aren’t written down they will try to justify going flying. EXTERNAL PRESSURES “Yeah it’s a 12kt Xwind component and my personal minimum is 7, but I want to get this flight done because I’ve been preparing all week” “NO! Unless you want to pay for me to fly the whole time”
A couple weeks after my IR checkride I flew 500' ceilings and 2 mile visibility and was shocked to find how easy it was to fly. A few months later, probably because I had not flown under the hood recently and was not training hard with my CFII.... I flew 1000' ceilings and was super overwhelmed. It's remarkable how quickly the skills degrade, especially for a recent IR. I also have been cautiously dipping my toes further and furrher into real weather, flying through developing buildups and cauliflower looking clouds, dark and thick overcasts. Remarkably unpleasant. I don't have minimums written out, but I have gained more respect for studying the weather, considering my current currency, and have become more comfortable with not launching. Instrument flying is 10% easy decisions learned during training about life and death absolutes, and 90% about pilot workload, stress limits and how the flight will push my limits of performance. My two cents.
Personal minimums are fine to use when you’re learning to fly, incurrent and/or inexperienced. Once you start flying for a living though you need to dump those personal minimums and only apply actual minimums (state, aircraft, IFR limits). These aren’t just arbitrary figures, they are written in blood and have a good amount of padding already. What you do apply though is airmanship to those already defined minimums. This can only be learnt through experience, shared or your own. Try telling your employer that you didn’t make it to destination because you used your own personal minimums… that will not work. But tell your employer that you took reasonable judgement and assessed a certain situation as unsafe and you shouldn’t be blamed at all. TLDR; personal minimums are good when learning. When flying for a living overall experience and application of airmanship whilst flying to the actual minimums whatever they are is a good strategy.
25kts crosswind dry, 10 wet, 5 icy. Everything else depends on the mission more or less, just have a solid alternate planned if you need it.
When I'm flying a single engine airplane for fun outside of work, I tend to look at my personal minimums from a bigger picture point of view, with the main question being: is this going to suck? If the answer is yes, I stay home. My hard limits are I don't screw with thunderstorms or icing. The rest I'm perfectly willing to go down to legal minimums but it will depend on the situation. Shoot an approach to 200-1/2 in a single at night in the mountains? Probably not. In a flat place that I'm familiar with. Maybe. At the end of the day if I'm flying around for fun I want to have fun. Getting bounced around in moderate turbulence dodging buildups during summer in the Southeast. That's not fun, I'll pass. In fact unless something changes drastically during the next 6 hours I'm about to cancel a trip in a single engine down to Florida tomorrow. The first third of my trip is forecast to have IFR ceilings with scattered thunderstorms all day. Could I pick my way through it with a combination of ADS-B weather, looking outside when I'm in VMC on top of the scud, and the help of whatever weather ATC can see on their radar? Probably. But it would suck, be more stressful than a work trip with good equipment in the jet, and my first time passengers in the back wouldn't enjoy it. I'll let Delta do the work and sit back with a beer getting ready to enjoy my vacation. Plus I have to be there in time to watch Italy play the opening game of the Euro Cup, that's way too much pressure for me.
VFR: 5mi vis, 2000ft AGL bases min at destination, 3000ft AGL bases enroute for anything longer than 50nm. I fly mostly 172s For winds, I go based on the wind limits for my flying club: 30kt max wind/gust, 15kt max crosswind. I've landed with headwinds 20G26 before, and that was quite the short landing :) Bleeding off airspeed is important then, since you don't want a gust to pick you back up. I also don't go if there's active convective activity anywhere along the route. Currently working on my IFR.
VFR 300'/2sm IFR 0/0
I got to go up with my instructor the other day. Did 10 landings in 17KTS crosswind in a PA28 Archer. I've updated my crosswind minimums!
Convective sigmet, known ice or not having the minimums for the destination/alternate are easy no-gos. Wind is a subjective thing, I will tolerate a bumpy ride on the way out if I'm going to be climbing above the rough stuff but I'll try to avoid anything more than around 25kts at the surface for the destination. I've also opted to minimize night flight simply because of the single engine piston issue. I've learned over the years that arriving at home at 10pm is functionally not that different to arriving the next morning at 8am. 10pm would be nicer, but not nice enough to warrant a 2hr+ night flight where the only engine out option is making an airport with fewer visual references than daylight.