172_driver, re "full-time-job", yes exactly, and to what end? What you have said is true...FDM certainly isn't about flying another pilot's airplane.
safetypee, thank you, very helpful links and your views - coincidentally I am in the process of joining EOFDM and have already downloaded a few of their publications which provide excellent guidance and perspective on FDM. The links you supplied, (and which you traditionally supply in your valuable contributions), help create the needed perspective with which to deal with this odd, singular "finding"; indeed, not only would it be a full-time job for several gatekeepers but it would destroy all trust and acceptance which we have worked so hard to achieve and maintain.
Regarding the 2nd link in your post, I have this and other presentations & papers by Pere Fabregas, (source is the
NLR), and we used the same approach as Fabregas to employ our flight data to assess our own landing performance risks on shorter runways; the analysis worked extremely well and the information was conveyed to our pilots as "trend information". Also, in the process we found that the touchdown point being generated by the FDM software was incorrect by one to four seconds and the "long landings" were not nearly as numerous once the touchdown point was more accurately determined, (using the air-ground parameter is, oddly, the poorest way of determining the t/d point, Ref.
A Study of Normal Operational Landing Performance on Subsonic, Civil, Narrow-Body Jet Aircraft During Instrument Landing System Approaches). The response to these reports has been very positive and effective in terms of reduced numbers of landing distance events, because the pilots know that we operate in a just culture supported right from the top.
P.S. John, the links worked for me but might it be a "country" thing? Were you able to get the documents online?