Like Bob said, different people have different thresholds for risk. There is also the risk vs. reward matrix one has to solve for every instance.
Personally, I don't fly the -8 in anything over about 10 knots right now. I'm just not comfortable, or good enough.
Professionally we have SOP madated minimums and maximums that make the desicion for us.
That said, I'll give you a for instance....
A bunch of years ago I was flying part 91 charter for a guy, and on the return leg of a trip we were tasked to bring an organ in for transplant. Picked it up in VA and it needed to be in FL for the patient within 12 hours or the patient, and organ would pass. Only problem was there was a tropical storm rolling through. Sounds crazy right? With a little planning and a lot of luck we timed our arrival between the rain bands. After a very hairy RNAV approach we broke out and landed a Seneca in rain with winds gusting 45+. We had a VFR alternate and there was no way I wasn't going to try. We made it, patient got the heart.
Some fewer number of years ago we were providing close air support for troops in contact north of Baghdad. It was a life/death situation for the guys on the ground and there were thunderstorms all around us. The only tanker available in clear air was in the southern part of the country, with about a 45 minute round trip transit. There was another 15 miles away trying to pick it's way through the weather to us. We opted to take the risk, remain over head, and burned down dangerously low to get these guys clear. Wound up joining and getting our much needed gas in the weather, for some of the scariest flying I never want to repeat.
It's not always black and white. A little knowledge can go a long way in risk mitigation depending on the circumstances.
That said, thunderstorms deserve a wide margin.
Kudos on these two examples. Two fantastic anecdotes for the risk/reward decision that has to be made. In both of these situations THE MISSION had to take precedent over the risk to the aircraft and personnel. No question about it.
A few points on the discussion though; I agree with Bob concerning personal vs group freedoms to decide for oneself whether one's decisions on the risk/reward meter meet PERSONAL minimums or maximums. Group insurance rates are a RED HERRING in this discussion. Any argument to that effect would imply the person making that argument is more concerned about themselves and not whether the actions of the person committing the act would have detrimental effects on the actor.
Concerning Sig600's examples, I think I might have slapped someone silly had some individual confronted me about flying in such risky conditions. Sometimes a risky action just has to be undertaken! Given that, I do feel that it would be extremely rare for me, and perhaps most others on this forum, to have to function in such a critical mission while flying my private aircraft. Each flight has its own unique mission that must be taken into consideration when evaluating the appropriate actions to be taken. Because of this, I can see where most commenting on this thread are going to think long and hard before flying anywhere close to thunderstorms. I know I do!
I have lived pretty much my entire life in Oklahoma. Wind, thunderstorms, hail, tornadoes are a way of life around here. If one spends any time at all in Oklahoma one would very quickly see things like ALL the local TV stations with their helicopters hovering nearby, not only thunderstorms, but tornadoes themselves! We have seen up close and personal footage right on our TV screens of these helicopter pilots getting incredible footage of developing or full blown tornadoes, LIVE! Do we chastise these pilots and the news producers for acting in such a risky manner when they place themselves and their aircraft in harms way?
A comment By Sig600 was made about a personal minimum about not flying his new RV8 in winds above 10 knots. This from the same guy that flew these two dangerous missions successfully. Well, power to him for setting those minimums for himself. He is the only one who has the knowledge to determine whether he or his aircraft can perform up to his standards in such situations. Who am I to say anything about his decisions?
Now perhaps I could have one moment of good natured teasing and say to him: In this part of the world if one did not fly in winds that exceeded 10 knots. . . well one might not ever find themselves flying much.
Regardless of that fact, ribbing aside, it is his decision to make. Whether I were to chastise someone for flying foolishly near a thunderstorm or chastise someone for not flying in winds above 10 knots, both situations would be inappropriate.
Live Long and Prosper!
