Wise thoughts and insightful stories above. Need to point out all of them for the plan B. Still appreciated, really.
Back to plan A? For the PIC to be lucid enough and discontinue on his/her own? That is what I had in mind when mentioning the responsibilities of the investigation body.
As mentioned above, I personally see quite some sense in a punitive rule for landing de-stabilized.
E. g. for continuously hot or high profiles, assuming 1000 ft OM-A policy:
- g/a before 1000 ft - ignored
- descend through 1000 ft: FDM event
- descend through 500: SOP violation that goes onto the file, this can be avoided by a g/a below 1000 but before 500.
- land from unstable at 500: demotion, this can be avoided by a g/a below 500 but before the touchdown
- landing past the markers or Vapp+25 - termination
Surely it can be tuned, possibly adding the DA as a gate. These days pilots are properly trained to take the landing decision (evaluation) at that moment.
Suggestions for other methods greatly welcome.