AirRabbit, apologies, I omitted to include the link (# 530) to p51’s post for the quote ‘Re: …’
At least you have made your view clear on the issue.
However, I believe that the effectiveness of the simulator in providing experience of deceleration remains open. IMHO new pilots under training in simulator tend to judge the condition of the runway surface (braking effectiveness) on the distance taken to stop, particularly when having been told what the runway conditions are, e.g judgement/experience in hindsight. I doubt that this method of judgement is used that often in routine operations where there is more reliance on the perceived deceleration, particularly if the visual cues are poor (rain / night) or limited (cat 2/3). Whilst use of deceleration is ‘good’ in the time sense of ‘now’ vs hindsight, there still remains the need to reflect on what has been experienced in order to form the memory of the experience.
In all other aspects, we agree.
I would add to the training, a need for greater emphasis on the variability of landing distance margins and the things which can erode them. Many pilots only consider the landing mass, distance, wind, and runway conditions, whereas variable or extreme weather conditions (perhaps as in this accident), the standard of runway surface maintenance and texture, and tyre conditions also have significant effects.
Gaining experience of these aspects is much more difficult and thus the ground school training must instil both knowledge and a trigger for recall; – how to avoid your item 3), e.g. red WXR zone over the runway in previous 15 min then the runway may be flooded – consider contaminated landing data, do not land downwind; TEM I think.