I'm a little confused as, for the narrow bodies (which is my background)
(a) a 1000 ft visual aiming point for a 3 deg slope brings the wheel height well under 50 ft coming over the keys. Not at all sure that I like the idea of bringing the aiming point back to achieve an earlier touchdown point ?
(b) since the 737 has been noted, I always found it to be a pussy cat to land - drive it down to the aiming point on speed, a touch of flare and paint it onto the runway. Worked pretty well near all the time. Touchdown point probably 1300-1500 ft typically.
(c) the normal distance factor gives adequate fat for the great majority of landings. If things are tight, then the touchdown can be a tad more pointed and brake and reverse use more aggressive. If things are too tight, I think I would prefer to go elsewhere rather than duck under indiscriminately (uness the obstacle profile is totally benign).
Or am I just getting way past it ?
PS. Perhaps 70 Mustang might consider reinstating the deleted posts - I thought both to be useful and pertinent to the discussion.