Fuji,
I am quite contented with my position and have clearly demonstrated tangible evidence to support the case.
The CAA says "seeing is believing" and we are waiting to see your communication or identification of the CAA member of Licensing Staff that replied to you as you (and BOSE) say.
Until then we have the tangible evidence on one side of the debate and hearsay on the other.
Nice to know that your insurer is available to provide a considered response so early on a Saturday morning.
As for telling other people - I have been doing that for decades - as have many others in the training industry. Until the CAA change the position, we will continue to do as before. We also expect students being told such information to take heed and use the information provided. Otherwise instructors are wasting their time. If the CAA change the position, the training industry will change the information included in lessons.
From a potential liability point of view, I would be far happier to incorrectly advise pilots to use minima which are more on the safe side of any legal limit than have the posibility that I was advocating or promoting using minima that are less than the established ones.
-----
bpilatus,
If the cloud base was 50ft below the MDA or DA how else could one get down and who is measuring anyway. Surely this activity (instrument approaches) can only be subject to to advisory heights.
You can not depart for a destination where the minima are below what is required unless you have planned for two available alternates where the weather (actual and forecast) is going to be above minima within a good time period round the ETA.
Even if the weather at destination is above minima, you still need to have an available alternate with appropriate weather that you can divert to should you not be able to land at the destination.
To use a destination with no alternate theweather has to be very good - something like VMC from MSA to the airfield.
One can not start an approach or continue below 1000ft AAL if the weather is below minima.
All those issues are deigned to prevent ducking under, multiple approaches going lower and lower and such like which in the past have contributed to accidents.
As for those "who is measuring?" - 6' X 6' X 3' is not a measurment you want to encounter too soon - which you will if you reguluarly duck under.
Regards,
DFC