Originally Posted by
safetypee
Sonic, there is a growing attitude in the industry that if something is 'legal' then it is safe - not so.
Alternatively, a course of action might not be 'legal', but when the choice and rationale is judged safe by the actor, in the situation, at that time, it is a good basis for 'legal' defence if ever required. ( Deffiniton and circumstance of 'legal' required re AFM, FCOM, and actual operation ).
Thus 7kts tail wind meets the requirement of the AFM performance, the 'gust' might not - hence the question. Without clear guidance about this, then prudence might conclude that an alternative runway (#4 vilas) would be a safer option.
In addition, the reported wind accuracy (gusts) might be more important to engine handling at the start of the takeoff, whereas errors in reported wind and gusts further down the runway or after takeoff could effect performance ( cf Denver 737 overrun accident where wind differences across the airport varied by 20kts ).
With respect to the question; I don't know, but with human traits I would probably takeoff … respecting engine operation, … except on a short runway where both engine handling and wind variability could affect performance.
The changeover point … I don't know, but at least with the op question I can think about it.
I believe You should read more carefully my last post…
”
Then whether this is safe and if it’s a good decision on a specific scenario is another matter, based on many different variables.”
You have cited part of those variables in Your post.