I'm sure the crownie tasted good Wombat, I've had a similar experience at Broken Hill. I was taught that the crosswind thing is "demonstrated" and you do not need to head for an alternate if the crosswind is up there.

The "demonstrated" seems to me to be a function of the rudder authority for a classical sideslip type arrival, but it doesn't allow for the alternate "crab till the last minute and then get straight" type of landing. In theory you can land in just about any crosswind with this technique.

Older and bolder instructors have demonstrated to me:

(1) Taxiiing the full length of the runway with nose gear off ground.

(2) Landing with windward main wheel alone until well below stallling speed.

These appear to be good exercises in aircraft control.

To be fair, there are a number of ways to satisfy the "book" requirements.

Furthermore, where i fly from, a decent crosswind is regarded as a training bonus,

It is quite frustrating, especially for those of us who live in the mountains and use that water for heating in the home. Another thing is the law about a fence around my outdoor spa pool - council inspected after installation - nothing said about the swift creek across the road or the lake around the corner. Can't chop down trees without permission. Asked the council to chop down a dangerous tree but no response so when the crash came in the middle of the night I checked that no-one was injured then gave them another phone call. Still, I've lived in UK and USA and I could probably think of a few things to whinge about there too.
And another thing - the holder of the certificate of registration is responsible, by a specific law, to provide pilots with adequate information for safe operation of their aircraft. So, when Sunfish comes to fly my Decathlon he'll find my notes recommending that certain parts of the POM be disregarded.
eg "Approach airspeed - 55 mph" compared to a book stall speed of 53 mph. It does note, however, "A relatively high rate of descent is possible ..."

Could well be wrong, here, because I'm paraphrasing what I read in a publication a while back, but the demonstrated x-wind component is related to the side load the gear will handle without damage (plus a margin) and the aeroplane remain controllable, if the aircraft is landed without drift correction at that crosswind component. (Any volunteers to test that one?):}
By a happy coincidence, that often seems to coincide with the maximum sideslip speed (side-ways speed) available at landing speed with full rudder.
I think it was a flight safety type journal; the article concerned how limits are determined for initial certification.
And, if remembered/interpreted correctly, explains at least in part, why so many of us can put one down relatively elegantly in more than the book crosswind. Especially if a higher than normal landing speed is used.
And right or wrong, wise or not-so, many aeroclubs I've been a member of had a lot of members, and often instructors, who were interested in relishing the difficult and trying out different ways of doing things. Not in a stupid, unplanned way, but in a thought-out, pre-planned way. (Well, sometimes not) And if it wasn't for attitudes similar to this, aviation just wouldn't progress much; improved procedures would evolve more slowly.
Re "jacking" the aircraft off the ground with flap, this is something I've tried, but would only consider using with manual flaps. Very direct reponse; no chance of flap runaway (had that once), and the reverse works well, too, that is, to abrubtly retract the flaps immediately after the flare, if there is any tendency to float coz you're a couple of knots too fast, or you get a gust.
Once again, I wouldn't do that with electric flaps, coz they go up slowly enough that lift produced, for the first few seconds of retraction, at the flare attitude, actually seems to increase briefly, then decrease slowly. Makes sense...if the wing is almost stalled flaring to land, then the area above the flaps is probably well and truly stalled, or at least closer to it. Raising them slowly might unstall the flaps, giving the aircraft an extra few seconds of float when it is least wanted. Plus of course, if at that point you need/decide to overshoot, you (or I) don't want the flaps retracting through 15 degrees on the way to nought. But with manual flaps, it can be real useful, and a tip I first heard about from an experienced bush pilot.
It seems though that this business of leaving the flaps up then lowering them at rotate probably wouldn't shorten the takeoff very much, because they simply ain't that draggy until a bit of speed has built up. I can't say for sure I've noticed any difference, it's just something I've played with a bit. The early 172's with the four-notch levers were real good in this regard, and gave the impression of using less distance,and with a more willing unstick.
I think PAFL has more to do with takeoff distance, than at what point during takeoff you lower the flaps.:E
Oh, by the way, in our little nanny-state, the hot water is limited to about 55 Celcius.:*

I was told by a very experienced ex-ag pilot with many thousands of hours in his log books that setting second stage of flap (25 deg) in the Auster when the tail was up would pop her into the air. I'm waiting for a relatively crossswind free day to give it a try.

One trick I have found useful in the Auster (which has quite effective split flaps) is that, after landing with full flap (third stage about 40 deg), it is advisable to get them retracted as soon as possible as they blank the airflow over the rudder when the tail is down. This is probably why it is inadvisable to select second stage flap when starting the take off roll.

I suspect a lot of the disagreement in this thread is due to the cultural differences between the UK and Australia.

By way of background to my opinions, I have done my GFPT in WA and have done some 20-odd hours flying training in the UK.

Australians have an obsession with following rules and fixing things with legislation, hence many of Sunfish's arguments, Student Pilot's Licences ASICs, wire fences around GA aerodromes, compulsory throttle locks, mandatory bathwater temperature and policemen behind every bush with radar devices.

The Brits, on the other hand follow the 'rules are for the guidance of wise men and the obeyance of fools' mentality. They allow you to solo with only a medical, leave planes unlocked in an open field with the keys on the coaming, use many non-standard approaches to airfields and, it seems to me, generally have a lot more variation to deal with than Aussie pilots. Oh, and if you're lucky enough to have a shower in your house, you can crank the temperature right up! :)

Maybe I'll change my opinion as my hours accrue, but I suspect it may be just reinforced.

A

Very interesting post Andy.
Not having been out to "the colonies" myself, I think that the general impression we are fed over here is the complete opposite of that, with us all wearing pinstripe suits and bowler hats moaning about the weather and the Gov't and the Aussies all doing pretty much what they want in the sunshine wering a pair of old KD shorts! (and feeling obliged to beat the sh1te out of petty bureaucrats whilst swigging VB :)

It seems the Paspalum Notatum is always greener on the other side of the fence :D

I thought Australia was so bl@@dy big that short strips couldn't possibly exist? :p :E

SS

I think that's a bit over the top Andy, so I won't start an international p&*^^ing contest. I simply refer you to the old truism "There are old pilots and bold pilots...". I am simply acutely aware of the human capacity to stuff things up, having reached the relatively advanced age of 55 and stuffed many things up in many fields, fortunately without getting anyone killed or injured, in the army, working for an airline and an aerospace company and elsewhere.

As far as flying goes, I am gradually exploring the limits of the envelope, do a "recovery from unusual attitudes" course and an "outback flying" course.

It may be that the Auster pops into the air when you lower flap, it might even be in the handbook, but the advice I've seen in two places is that the savings in takeoff roll are negligible in most aircraft, if the flaps malfunction while lowering them you are history, and you don't need the workload at 40-50 knots if you really are on a short rough outback strip. Instead you should be watching for that errant Kangaroo:ok:

LowNSlow,

Its a very long time since I've flown an Auster but the thought of trying to change the flap setting during the take off run amazes me. I seem to remember that it took both hands and teeth just to pull the handle out so that you could move it.

Short field
 

Yes, there was a knack with operating the Auster flaps. As an instructor on them I got adept at reaching past the student and operating them from the right hand seat. I know I couldn't do it now, but it became second nature after a while.

Sunfish the flaps on the Auster are manually actuated via a long lever above the left seaters left shoulder. As Pulse1 points out, the operation can be a bit difficult which is why I have not tried this "technique" yet. I feel that is better to be using the right hand to attempt to push the throttle through the firewall rather than faffing around with the flap lever. If the throttle friction let the throttle retard it would overcome any gains made by lowering flap apart from any potential control difficulties caused by reaching aross to the flap lever.