This is a non-argument. Sunfish is absolutely corrrect : his "by the book and nothing else" policy will (hopefully) ensure that he flies safely, and that if anything does go wrong, he won't get the book thrown at him. Good luck to him.
Then again ... two weeks ago at Cranfield my plane landed with absolutely no problems in a cross wind of exactly twice the "demonstrated maximum limit" specified in the POH. I've often heard people say that this limit is simply there to cover the manufacturer's backside, a philosophy born of the litigious '80s in the US.
Which does tend to make you wonder ... after all, I've flown with a lot of very experienced guys who do things which defy the manual, and I'm still here. I'm not saying this is the way to go, I'm just stating facts.
Looking at my X-wind example, and watching these guys do their "non-POH" things, has made me wonder how much of the POH actually reflects real aircraft limitations, and how much "don't sue me" margin is built in to many POH "limits" ...
Let me say quite clearly that if you're a new or low-houred pilot, and you decide not to follow the POH to the letter, I think you're stupid. If you decide to try out a new "technique" simply because you've read about it on this forum, without actually flying with someone with the requisite experience first, you're equally stupid. But would I slate the guy who showed me how to
really get my plane out of a short, very soft field recently, using techniques which don't appear anywhere in my POH ?
Well, perhaps when I've got 12,000 hours as well ...
Fly safely,
FF
