Phantom
Nice comments and some real practical advice about V/S over VNAV. I think V/S is better myself, as you are much more in control and 'in the loop', but you need to get configured and all checks out the way as you say, to concentrate on the profile.
When I fly an non-precision approach I write out check altitudes for every DME mile on a bit of paper (someone mentioned that a couple were omitted on this approach chart, which indeed they are), especially when all I am offered is a platform and a marker crossing altitude. I get the other pilot to check these in the cruise to look for errors. I then brief the PM that I want a call at every DME mile plus half (i.e, at 8.5d, 7.5d, 6.5d) with the NEXT crossing altitude, i.e. passing 8.5d - "8d - 2890ft", then as I pass 8d a call such as "50ft high".
The other benefit of getting fully configured before descent is you can cross check groundspeed and aim for an appropriate V/S (shown in the box to the right of the vertical profile on this LIDO chart.) If you aren't fully configured and are going to try to slow down and go down the final approach what V/S are you picking at the descent point? Invariably things are starting to get a little rushed, a V/S is selected (usually too much) and then with config and speed reduction the attention is lost from the V/S and the approach is already getting unstable with a high rate of descent (100fpm+) which is not checked until (usually at least) 2nm further on, when it is realised that you are going low.
However, regarding
it is often easier said than done, especially with regard to the "fully configured" bit, when ATC vectors you in tight, there is a tailwind, or finger trouble with MCP selections, all resulting in not being at the correct platform ht
Well, I would argue that is the airmanship element. Brief it FULLY and PROPERLY, get ahead of the game and stay ahead. Think about the tailwind and slow earlier. Tell ATC what you require, don't necessarily just accept being turned in too early. NEVER forget about that fantastic speed reducer that is the landing gear. So many pilots seem reluctant to use gear really early when it will regain the upper hand easily. Forget slick, min fuel burn approaches when doing non-precision approaches; get down and get dirty!!! How many pilots consider taking the landing gear on a radar vectored base leg to a non-precision final approach when you can see they are only just going to make the platform altitude at the descent point? They only have a couple of stages of flap and need to configure fully and slow down still, but many try to fly it just like it is an ILS. Never ceases to amaze me. ATC invariably vector you tight as they think that is efficient and what you want (which it is for an ILS!!!) Brief this and then it is no surprise, drop the gear and stay ahead of the game!
I have flown 75/76 and now fly both genres of 73 in charter ops, so probably get much more exposure to non-precision approaches than the average 777/747 pilot, but that says to me that longhaul pilots need to give it even more thought and get slowed down and configured EARLY!!
PP