PPL requires three hours under the hood doing BAI flying.  I think staying VFR is emphasized but the hood time can lead to a false sense of security.

I am aware that a fixed gear 310hp naturally aspirated piston single is not high performance or complex in the big picture.

I'm discussing why people sometimes call an SR22 "high performance" without being "complex." Jets like you mentioned require a type rating in the civilian world.

This is all codified in FAR 61.31.

If you'll read back on my comment, I was speaking specifically about the FARs. "From a regulatory standpoint" were my exact words.

I don't think you get to use an "unable" when they call a go around.

I was recently departing a satellite airport of a major city. Approach control asked us to ident and for whatever reason after three calls and three tries, interrupting our cleanup schedule, checklist, and altitude callouts as we had a an assigned level off a 2,000, she wasn't picking it up. She berated us, "I need you to ident, that is the most important thing right now" Um no, it's not.

I've flown Santa Fe to Fort Collins at night in a 210, just follow the roads which are easy to see and it keeps you over terrain that you can see the elevation, just don't try this along I-70 at Eisenhower tunnel. That said, I have ten times the hours now that I did then and I wouldn't do it today.

And you would be wrong.  

§ 91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.
(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.

(b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.

(c) Each pilot in command who deviates from a rule under paragraph (b) of this section shall, upon the request of the Administrator, send a written report of that deviation to the Administrator.

This is true.

All you have to do is explain it to FSDO

I suppose you're right, but I think it would be a hard justification.

Edit: what's the emergency? I suck as a pilot?
Double edit. I'm specificaly refuring to the hobby crash.

It's always going to be situationally different.  Usually it's a matter of self preservation to honor a go-around, whether its ATC calling it, or someone else on your crew.  Someone else might know something you don't.  But there certainly can be times to disregard an ATC directed go-around; too many situations to name here.

Not at all.  She was low time, in way over her head and obviously having a problem safely getting the aircraft down.  "Emergency" doesn't necessarily have to mean on fire or control malfunction.     The reality is she likely wouldn't have to justify it to anyone.  The regulation states," upon the request of the Administrator, send a written report of that deviation to the Administrator"  If you were really in a jam and were concerned about an FAA action you could easily let them know you think your engine might be running rough.  

Had she said unable, the controller might would have had to send another jet around but I seriously doubt anything would have come from it other than a stern tone on the radio.  If it did...so what?  You and your family is still alive to deal with it.

But we know that she died. She probably thought everything was ok until it wasn't. I don't remember if fuel was an issue or not. A go around is supposed to be the safer alternative to continuing the landing. So calling a landing in spite of contrary atc instructions, you better have a reason.

IIRC atc sent her around twice because of faster aircraft behind her (I think they jacked her around in the pattern too, I'll have to look again)  I'm just pointing out that because they say so doesn't mean you have to, you are still responsible for the safety of the aircraft.  It's a good idea to follow atc most of the time but if it is screwing you up so bad you can't safely fly the aircraft, it's time to put it on the ground and deal with the rest later.

That was going to be my point.   People throw out the complex endorsement like it's some hard thing to do.  I got my endorsement for complex and HP in 2.1 hours.

Tower talked that lady into what they wanted, she stopped aviating.  Fuck them, fly the plane.  Sounds like she got slow, "kept it in tight" and she spun it in.  Turned them into a bag of broken bones.

Ive been in 2 accidents, neither of them I was PIC but the 1st one the guy stopped flying, we touched down and the left main locked up.  Instead of throwing the nose down he kept the yoke back until we hit a parked car.  Yes, a parked car.

2nd one was fuel related and we ended up in a field, the pilot kept flying until we were stopped, it saved both of us.  Couldn't have had a worse field to land in, it looked flat from 1500' but it was black diamond moguls.

The pilot in the Hobby crash could have said, "this approach is not coming together, I'm going around".  No question, it would have screwed up the controller's flow but the pilot has the absolute authority and responsibility for the operation of the aircraft and the safety of the flight.

Regarding sucking as a pilot, the point at which a pilot becomes task saturated will vary with the individual.  And, there is not a single pilot alive who has not become task saturated at some point in their career.  Some pilots can manage a multitude of systems and controller requests simultaneously others, not so much.  This will vary with the skill of the individual, familiarity with the aircraft, recent flight experience and fatigue (along with a host of other human factors).  If you make an "UNABLE" call and the controller believes that it was unwarranted, then a statement to the FSDO explaining the situation and why you were unable to comply with the request should be sufficient provided no FAR's were violated.  If rules were broken, there should be some pretty good reasons why they were violated.

I'm referring to the opposite situation, ATC lost separation and tells the pilot to go around, and the pilot says "unable" and lands. I understand deviation authority, but to deviate and land requires a pretty good reason.

I've actually seen that occur a couple of times.

In one incident a guy in the pattern was cleared  for a touch and go but his engine quit so he coasted to an exit but didn't clear the hold bars. The controller told the next plane to go around as their won't be appropriate separation.

The pilot responded with their tail number but continued the approach. Another go around instruction, no response and he landed. The ground controller gave them the Brasher Statement, he called the tower and said he felt like he had room to land without getting near the other aircraft so he did.

Supervisors did their paperwork, controllers did their statements and a few days later we get asked by management if at any time the pilot mentioned engine issues. We get to review the tapes of our parts in the situation and sign new statements.

One of the local CFIs came to visit with his students and we get to talking about it and he says the guy is in some shit because he told FSDO he didn't go around due to engine issues. They pulled his entire flight's tapes and he never once said anything about it and had no maintenance performed after the flight. The FBO he worked for was charging the guy for parking through the whole thing so he was pissed at them.

That's a bold choice Cotton, lets see if it pays off.

Preliminary NTSB report added to first post.

Appears some poor decisions were made.

Report: Fort Collins family encountered rough weather before fatal plane crash

"The Fort Collins family killed in a plane crash north of Glenwood Springs on Sept. 15 flew through fog and wind gusts before their plane went down, according to a newly released report.

The National Transportation Safety Board, the federal agency investigating the crash, released a preliminary report this week that gave details on the crash site and the weather conditions during the flight."

Wind gusts as noted are not typically bad.  Fog (clouds) are for fair weather pilots.

I will see if anyone reads the article and note the comment that shows that family can be blind to the truth.

Um,

No.