Well, one such operation involves the demonstration of what's possible in unusual circumstances.
And not picking on Tecman, but there are a lot of unusual circumstances which one could dream up, and then a very non standard action to tinker with to try to make it better. Ultimately, you'll come back around to simply applying yourself to fly a good approach and landing. That good approach will include thinking far enough ahead of the plane that you're not extending so much flap so far back that it could create a problem for you down final later.
I have seen pilots with "great new ideas" about how to fly over the decades. Other than incorporating new technology (which flaps are not), I have found that the tried and true methods work best.
There is a veiled suggesting that there is a possible
need to modulate flaps down final in some cases. I disagree. Using my own experience as a measure, I have landed more than 75 type of planes more than 30,000 times in 40 years, and I have never thought to reduce the flap setting on a continued approach. Further to that, fewer than 1% of those landings would have been conducted with a flap extension of less than full as I "crossed the fence". From that experience, I just cannot figure out why someone would want to start inventing needless procedures to compensate for poor technique they applied earlier in the approach - just fly the approach right in the first place!