The diversion into Anchorage was in an A340-300 - approach speed about 160kts or so.
Both manufacturer's philosophies seem to work except where a FOQA program is involved. Then, to me anyway, if we know that an aircraft has exceeded the manufacturer's limits as set out in the AMM but the pilot hasn't logged the event, then how can flight operations or maintenance say "it didn't happen" when the data shows it did? To me that opens a huge liability issue but there it is, we've tried to get answers but we're greeted with silence.
As far as philosophies go, I prefer knowing to not knowing, and that includes what the aircraft has been through. If it's had a hard landing and it isn't reported by the crew that did it, there is a problem and it's more than an ethical one, it's a safety problem. That said, Boeing is clear and so is the airline's flight ops and maintenance departments: if the pilot didn't report it, it didn't happen.
On that basis, regardless of what it says, the FOQA data is dismissed, outright, I am informed.
Also, as far as I know, its still not an issue if a crew decides to take off with the brake temps higher than 300C. No directives and no communications with the pilots have said otherwise and the few times it has happened, it has been excused as "special circumstances" by management personnel.