Originally Posted by
giggitygiggity
There are far too many problems with that 'technique' to endorse it. If you don't look up til 50ft on a 3.5, 4 or 4.5deg visual segment (eg a slightly steeper approach), you're going to wallop it into the runway and break something OR you'll snatch at it in horror, overflare and whack the tail. Maybe it works on a conventional aircraft (I don't fly non-fbw), with someone to save you by feeling through what you're doing on the yoke and save the day, I can promise you that it's neither reliably even vaguely useful on the Airbus. There are far too many variables to come up with a rad alt to add a specific input to the controls. I'm not doubting that it might work some times, but you'll fluke it until one day you break your lovely aircraft.
Eyes up away from the aiming point AT THE LATEST crossing the threshold (not starter extension, the landing threshold) so you can judge the closure rate and flare the aircraft smoothly and progressively to reduce (don't stop) the closure rate towards the runway. Eyes don't need to be at the end of the runway or anywhere specific, just somewhere else (away from the aiming point) so you can judge that closure rate and have it done soon enoug... Soon enough is is simply 'not too late', don't be fixated on wherever your final aiming point ended up being.
Sure I don't argue with the fact that my technique might be rubbish, I wasn't trying to teach anyone or recommend it, just describing what I do which results in repetitive landings which have always been a pass for me, a 3 on the 1 to 5 grading system. What I care about is landing on centreline, within the touchdown zone, wings level and at the correct pitch. If it's firm, positive, carrier or whatever I don't care during a line check.
On the last paragraph, it can be consistent with what I said though. If you keep flying the aircraft towards the aiming markers down to 50 feet that's also where the threshold begins (on a normal 3º slope anyway), and that's when you start looking further ahead.