I was taught to consider every approach to be
'an approach to a missed approach' (i.e. you should always be expecting to have to go-around at any point) but that there comes a point, very late, during an approach when you're able to decide that it's actually safe to land (e.g. think of a Cat IIIA - when at 50' RadAlt you hope you can see enough runway lights to allow you to positively identify it as the runway, and land - and basically the same is true of any approach from that through to CAVOK too).
Moving on, I think you'll find that what most aeroplane flying manuals actually say is something like 'the demonstrated cross-wind limit is XX kts', i.e. the manufacturer took the aircraft to somewhere very windy, with a test pilot flying it, and proved just how much wind the beast will handle. That does not mean that this is the actual limit, only the demonstrated one (but remember, this was determined by a test pilot, working for a manufacturer who wants to sell the aircraft, and who so needs it to seen as a capable a machine as possible, against their competitors aircraft - whom are doing the exact same with their aircraft).
Accordingly, as there really is not a limit, you might fancy 'having a go' when the wind is beyond the 'demonstrated limit' but in that instance your are in effect acting as a test pilot, as result of which (and as Lenny Godber says above) you might very well have to justify your actions at a subsequent Board of Enquiry and / or in Court - assuming that is that you actually manage to crawl out of the wreckage !
Nb. The above of course assumes no overriding local airport or country limitations and / or airline limits as stated in the Operations or Flying Manuals, etc.
Maybe then this is what DontSink is trying to imply when he/she wrote 'you just have to give it a try'.
Uhm ?!
