Rubbish....all this shows is a lack of basic automation competencies...or the aeroplane should never have been certified for pax carrying operations as several of my, very experienced, mates attest. If you have to turn stuff off that isn't broken then you don't know what you're doing...it is just that simple.
Chimbu.
Congratulations on your new command but I would suggest a red flag there. By your own admission, you know nothing of Airbus, yet your convictions bulletproof. And I would prefer a discussion based on science and not " my very experienced mates".
In my experience with Airbus, unstable approaches and a number of fatal accidents ( Air India, Gulf Air, Armavia etc ) have one thing in common at the latter stages- degraded automation. In the case of the Air France A340 overrun, the Autothrust was simultaneoulsy disengaged with the Autopilot at 300 feet. Why? Well again Chimbu, you have all the answers.
Hosing rain, contaminated runway, lightning destroyed wind reporting equipment, strong x wind that sounds like it gave a small tailwind component too, unstable approach...and, theoretically at least, the lesser qualified pilot flying. I would have been amazed had it not ended badly.
You must be dreading the upcoming monsoon and typhoon season. So, they were lured into the approach.
Confidence and currency in a late GA from an unstable approach, regardless of position and configuration, probably the only way to counter the problem. Rembering that in most crashes in approach and in foul weather, aircraft have landed ahead- overshoot shear, turbulence increasing TWC due a gust front etc isn't linear nor predictable.
Two of the four Airbus outfits I have worked for practiced late GA from an unstable position. Not difficult and when versed and with curreny, takes away a bit of the committment psycology to a difficult approach.