In Oz we don't have the "badly positioned" provision in our MATS - conduct of the approach is up to the pilot.
If the gear's not there, or you can see there's a real possibility of CFIT or some other disaster, I think would be a legal duty of care and M/A instructions would be appropriate. Otherwise, let the pilot fly the aeroplane.
There's nothing wrong with a query or prompt - "you appear high on profile, do you wish to continue approach?" or, if it's low (but not at risk of CFIT) "you appear low on profile, radar indicates xxx feet, check altitude" or similar. I'd only do it if the apparent error is pretty gross. It lets the pilot know that ATC sees something out of the ordinary and that's worthy CRM input, if nothing else.
A few years ago an arriving 747 was twice profile height for the whole time he was on tower radar and was in VMC the whole time - an 8 eighths blue day. 6000ft at 10 miles, 3000 at 5 miles, etc. He was given the profile advisories by terminal and TWR 3 times between 20 miles and 5 miles, each time with the option of a missed approach. Each time he said, "No, we'll land". So tower gave him the wind, reminded him of runway length, gave him M/A instructions in terms of "If you wish to go around at any time..." and also a landing clearance.
The aeroplane decided for him - it arrived over the threshold in excess of 200 kt g/s (by radar) into a 25kt headwind and obviously wouldn't stop flying. It cruised a few metres above the ground for about 2500m of the 4000 odd available and then went around. Fingers were poised on the crash button. I think it was done the right way, but I'd be interested to hear other views if there are any.
AA
Last edited by Ausatco; 11th September 2002 at 00:42.