Do you actually read what you write FGD:
This thread is not really about landing technique. More about ATSB reports. Suggest you make your comment on the Barwon Heads PA31 thread.
This is a few postings after this:
he ATSB's findings and "safety message" from the Barwon Heads incident suggest that they believe the pilot's non appreciation of ALA standards was the major factor.
This is WRONG. That aspect was not the major factor and I'm sure most pilots would agree with me.
The major factor was the flight path and the management thereof. This flight path was either chosen by the pilot, or was imposed on him by the circumstances, or was some combination of both.
The ATSB seem to believe that the runway threshold is the target of the flight path. This is not the case. Pilots are trained to touchdown at an "aiming point" which is some distance beyond the threshold. Passing over the threshold at 50 feet, on a descent angle of 3 degrees, for example, puts the aiming point about 300 metres beyond the threshold.
Why 50 feet over the threshold? Pilots are trained to do this because this is the optimum, according to landing performance theory. If this pilot had been conducting the approach in accordance with how he had been trained, and in accordance with his knowledge of landing performance, he would have been about 63 feet (19 metres) above the height of the threshold at the point he passed over the truck.
The aircraft was well below where it should have been. The pilot's poor management of the flight path had entirely eroded the safety margins that are provided by a normal approach.
This is the real "safety message" from this incident. Sure, ALA standards may have been a contributing factor, but only by a few centimetres.
Try again, ATSB.
And this just proves you have absolutely no idea about commercial GA operations:
Sounds like you must be landing overweight, Car RAMROD. That's your choice.
Those of us who have know exactly what Car RAMROD is talking about.