Crikey! It's like listening to old codgers arguing about how to hold a golf club.
TyroPicard has quoted the FCTMs, anything else is merely your own way of how you "hold the club".

Interpret the FCTMs (be that Boeing or Airbus), however you want. None of them say to use exclusively the PFD from the moment you pass through 8 degs pitch.
On the contrary...

I'll end with this one:

If you're relying on rad alt call-outs below 20 feet, you're doing it wrong. :ugh:

SOP to call RAD ALT below 20 ft?Rubbish.
Again,people trying to reinvent the wheel...
If you finished the flare maneuver (pitch up) and your thrust is at idle(without delaying and chopping at 10FT as so many do)then its not time to read this damn RAD Alt but to release the elevator force and let it settle down.
The only useful countdown would be time of flare maneuver..after 3 secs,,let it be.
Chinese fos and in general aim for a smooth touchdown and QAR are a daily reminder for them that the technique to fly it down like the Autoland would is not only not appropriate nor safe.

If passengers really care for smooth landings,then it should always be Captain's landings and their future captains with little hands on will be waiting for them during this dark stormy night...
Being a First officer is the time to make mistakes and learn from them...Captains should only intervene if safety is at risk and not ones pride.

China Hainan Airlines operating A330's would agree with you but for a different reason. Their F/O's have caused frequent damage to the aircraft with heavy landings and tail strikes on take off, that the authorities were forced into taking drastic measures. This disproves your assertion that being a first officer is the time to make mistakes. Tell that to naïve fare paying passengers...

F/O's in that airline are now not permitted to conduct take off and landings until five years on type. While that means the captains get all the take off and landings, at least the passengers can breath a sigh of relief. It is also an indictment of the poor training undergone by new pilots to type. It is a good bet that the accent during type rating training is predominately on full use of the automatics with very little time spent on manual raw data handling in the circuit and crosswinds. Better utilisation of valuable simulator time is one solution.

Other SE Asian airlines pushing low hour cadets into the right seat of jet transport jets have similar restrictions in experience level when allowing take off and landings by first officers. For example 800 hours on type on line before being permitted to take off and land.

Quite sure that an impending hard landing and /or tail strike should have the captain intervene before it happens,now,maybe as you mentioned,it is probably time they teach the basics correctly in the simulator in the first place rather than teaching them how to reproduce an autopilot landing.
I am all but aware about these restrictions,flying most of the sectors is quite enjoyable however I believe detrimental to the airline safety in the long run.
The CAAC is a quite active one,sometimes making good decisions, sometimes questionable ones such as those take off restrictions.

Smooth landing
 

It can be done, even in a 757.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfCiKYWvxfQ

Of course it can be done, it is not the discussion here..:}
OP, 1.5 G is well within the norms..and a soft landing could show 1.5 if landing full flaps,heavy,and ever slightly underthrust....

Hi Folks … sorry for joining the discussion this late, but I’ve been reading the previous posts, and unless I’ve dramatically misunderstood something, I was going on the understanding that the discussion involved “landing” the airplane … and, as a result, I’m a bit in the dark about understanding the point during landing that “useful visual reference is lost.” As I’ve understood the landing task, the only time a landing should be attempted without appropriate visual references would be when the airplane is “auto-land equipped” and the crew is appropriately qualified for that task. Am I missing something here?

Nah, Rabbit, you haven't missed anything. This discussion is just so advanced that you and I can't grasp it.

Thanks, Amadis ... and it wouldn’t be the first time that folks got lost in the trees trying to find the forrest

With two 737 over runs this week I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the importance of a good landing is........high.
I am not a training Captain, but as a line Captain the two biggest mistakes I see are
1/ not choosing a visual aiming point and sticking to it during the last 300ft.
2/ spending too much time scanning instruments below 100ft and not enough time looking out the window.
Ps, anyone know how much runway a 737-800 uses in a perfect flare that is in excess of following the three degree slope ?

I guess I’m having a hard time understanding any circumstances that would allow a pilot to graduate from any initial training with any airline, anywhere, pass the initial proficiency check, and still not know how to land the airplane. However, it is becoming apparent to me that this does occur … and my incredulity stems from the fact that I’m continually hearing that the responsibility for having such an untrained and ill-prepared pilot is the fault of that untrained pilot!
What kind of regulatory approval exists for those airlines?
To what kind of acceptance process is the training program subjected?
Who does the final approval of the training program content?
Who trained the instructors?
What is expected from the instructors and evaluators?
What the heck are the instructors doing?
Who oversees the training process?
What evaluator would accept such “proficiency” demonstration?
And those kinds of questions can go on and on and on …. But perhaps the very last straw would be (at least in my world) … why would the other pilot in the cockpit with such an ill-prepared and/or error-prone pilot, continue to agree to subject themselves (not to mention the remainder of the crew and passengers!) to the continued incompetency of a pilot who apparently has no clue about how to land the airplane – every time, all the time, each time, both professionally and safely?

I've been flying the A320 for seven years and still can't land it. Does that help your query?

Hello Mr. Ferret - thanks for the reply. But before I get too far into an exchange, I probably need to ask you straight out ... are you saying that after 7 years you cannot land your A320 airplane at all; you don't make landings that are consistent; every once in a while you wind up really "planting" the airplane on the runway; or the majority of your landings are not the mythical, 'we-didn't-know-we-were-on-the-ground' kind of "greased-on" landings? I ask because the answer(s) to these kinds of questions tend to reveal the actual source of your comment. And before you ask ... No, I'm NOT "pulling your chain," or attempting to belittle or insult you. I hope you provide an honest and direct answer. I'm looking forward to your response.

I'm curious to hear about his difficulties as well. I've been on the 320 for only 14 months now, but have only had one "bad" landing, and that was only my second landing on the type during IOE.

There are Ok landings; bad landings and really bad landings in an A320. One crew had only 1 'really' bad landing, in Eire. Smooth touchdown, wrong airport. I suspect there was more than an "oops" in the flight deck.

At what speed?

(I'm tempted to ask "An African swallow or a European swallow?")

144 knots ground speed. African.

Patent US3899147 - Trailing-wheel undercarriage train - Google Patents

Look folks I never pretended to know how these flying machines work but I could always plant a jet with the aforementioned system better than one without. Comments on a postcard please.