Indeed - as presented in the post it was probably fortuitous it was his 'last flight'.

Depends on the aircraft type. I have seen a caribou on a 10 degree final to opposite end threshhold with a landing roll within those threshold markings.
With a swept wing jet airliner, with all other safety boxes ticked, I would consider continuing if stabilised aproach with target still within the touchdown zone, provided ROD not excessive.
PAPI is not God and I have seen military airfield PAPI installed for earlier touchdown zone. In my airliner, this PAPI target was all white.
I believe that fog can cause all white lights at lower angles. Greater caution might be needed during these conditions where PAPI might otherwise be considered useful.
A simple question but such a variety of responses.

better to be in the air explaining why you did a go around than on the ground explaining why you did not

Caribou pilot demonstrating need for care with high approach angles...

I think that's the point. If you fly at 1000 fpm down to the runway, say for the last 1000 feet or so, at typical approach speeds that equals an approach angle much higher than the normal 3 degrees.

There are some runways in the world where the approach slope is higher than 3 degrees, and that is then called a "steep approach", is specially mentioned on the approach charts and requires special procedures (e.g. a different flap setting than a normal 3 degrees approach), briefings, and sometimes even special training for pilots.

Now just because you fly such kind of approach unplanned, does it make that so much easier that you can skip all those special procedures required for a steep approach?

- yes, but at least he was in the t/d zone.................:)..

And by landing at the right speed he didn't use excessive runway or braking.

PAPI at 3.55 degrees, 10 kt reported tailwind with 20 Kt windsock straight out telling you its far more than what's reported, landing at almost 8000 ft MSL in the mountains after coming off a NPA with descent rate approaching 2700 FPM down inside the FAF and a GS at 180 Kts, almost at tire limits onto a 8000 ft runway.

You see 4 whites, whaddya do?

Not some theoretical, rather a real airport with lots of challenges.

Auto brake to max?

I am the auto brakes, hell, the AT as well.

That is a very particular airport, and your company policy will set the rules.

2700 fpm? Sounds like too much, to me

Close to 3000fpm ROD, 20kt tailwind, 3,5 degree slope, close to tire limits, 8000' rwy = circle-to-land or diversion, unless I was in a Twin Otter or similar with loads of time on type and a really pressing need to force it in, e.g. medical case.

No circling, Aspen Colorado is already scary enough landing on ry 15 let alone scraping the hill on a circling g approach. Yes, 2500-2700 is quite common inside the FAF when flying the IAP.

What type are you landing at Aspen with 20 knots pushing you?

CRJ-700. 10Kts reported tailwinds but 20Kt windsocks completely erect.

Whilst we do operate into strips other than your bog-standard 3-degrees-to-3-kilometres quite regularly, I suspect I might just divert on that particular day, but that's just me :) May it always work out for you.

Not always! Enough however that our safety record is still intact

This topic just shows why judgement is still so important in aviation. Whilst its always good in training to give students some pretty firm boundaries so they can develop their experience I am extremely frustrated with the push to put black and white law to every situation for people flying the line. The earlier post of 'it depends' says it all. There are so many variables even when flying the sane type into the same port every day that we must use our judgement to make thus type of decision.

If you flying a medium or heavy jet into a normal port (3 degree app and PAPI) it's not a normal view and you have to consider how you got here. ie ham fisted handling or were you left high by ATC and you have been working on fixing the problem, are in control and both pilots know what's going on. 'I saw four whites so I went around' is a pretty lame excuse but 'the approach was getting out of hand (even if not technically unstable) so I felt the a missed approach was the best course of action' should be fine with any reputable operator.

Funny thing about KASE, the RNP AR approach can have a very normal glide path--3 degrees--but a winding track. The airport is in a deep, rising valley with a "head wall" not far beyond. During the heat of the day, air rises up the valley, like a chimney creating tailwinds on final. Circling to 33 is a no-no in jets, at least at my operator. Pretty much one-way in, one-way out.

OTOH, the LOC-DME-C does have about 7 degree descent angle off of Red Table. Fanning the boards all the way in on a Global.