These minimums for "single pilot ops" only apply to Commercial Ops don't they? As far as I'm aware as a "Private" pilot you can take off in any weather so long as it is above the minimums specified on the approach plate for the airport......
A number of things being confused here:
i) The 800m minimum applies to landings not take-offs.
ii) Single Pilot approach minimum of 800m is mandatory for all operations regardless of Private, AW or PT.
iii) There are regulations concerning T/O minima, which stipulate minima in the 175-300m range for an instrument runway, depending on lighting and markings, but also stipulate that an airfield above minima must be identified within 30 mins engine-out flight time. This only applies to PT flights, which is why SE aircraft do not have to magically fly for half an hour at 70kts following an engine failure.
If I was to take a multi engine airplane with anti-icing I could fly in much worser conditions? Of course having the licence to fly that thing first.
Again, a possibly confusion of two issues. There are legal requirements, the only relevant one being that you must not fly into known icing unless the aircraft is certified and there are your own rules based on your own risk assessment.
In the latter category you have to decide if you are going to take off in very poor visibility and/or cloud base in (i) a single and (ii) a twin.
In a single, if you have an engine failure where the visibility is less than about 4000m or the cloudbase less than say 5-800' it is going to be very much a matter of luck as to whether you live or die. You can ensure that you hit the ground slowly and in a level attitude, but not much more. Your life depends on whether you then find a vertical obstacle or not. Bear in mind that the visibility criteria include night. Also, if you are over water, your survival will depend on the equipment you carry, your familiarity with it and your ability to communicate your distress to someone able to help you. As I said before, in a single you also have to worry about failure of other critical components such as alternator and suction system.
In a twin your chances of survival following an engine failure are going to depend upon your skill in dealing with the failure and the characteristics and loading of the aircraft (plus factors like temperature and pressure.) If you have a failure immediately after takeoff (say in the first 15 seconds) and you have allowed your skills and alertness to diminish you are probably worse off than in a single, because the ensuing crash is likely to be vertical rather than horizontal. However, if you keep your skills at a good level you have a better than reasonable chance of flying away (depending on weight and performance.) If you decide that the only solution is to stop the live engine, then you are less well protected in the ensuing crash than in a single.
However, if you have an engine failure when you are not near the ground, your chances of survival in poor conditions are much higher than in a single, because, even with limited skill and experience, you should be able to divert to a suitable airfield and land safely.
The choice of single or twin for IFR operations is as emotive as between religions or operating systems. I have decided that I will only fly a twin except on a clear day over farmland. For every one of me you will find someone to say "nonsense, SEP IFR is the way to go."
It is your respinsibility to take your own decision, based on what you learn, read, hear and analyse.
Timothy