If it is anticipated that one or more element(s) of the next target will not be met,  the required corrective action(s) should be taken without delay. During the approach and landing, the successive next targets should constitute gates that should be met for the approach to be continued.
The Final Approach Fix (FAF), the Outer Marker (OM) or an equivalent fix (as applicable) constitute an assessment gate to confirm the readiness to proceed further.
The minimum stabilization height should constitute a particular gate (i.e. decision gate) along the final approach. 
If the aircraft is not stabilized on the approach path in landing configuration, at the minimum stabilization height, a go-around must be initiated unless the crew estimates that only small corrections are necessary to rectify minor deviations from stabilized conditions due, amongst others, to external perturbations.
The Flight Operations Briefing Note Flying Stabilized Approaches describes:

. All the elements of a stabilized approach; and,

. The flight parameter exceedance callouts performed by the PNF if one flight parameter exceeds the criteria defined for one of the elements of a stabilized approach.

IV Adverse Factors and Typical Errors The following factors and working errors often are observed during transition and line training:

. Late, therefore rushed descent, approach preparation and briefing, resulting in  the omission of important items;

. Failure to cross-check FMS data entries;

. Failure to account for track-distance differences between expected routing and actual routing (i.e., STAR versus radar vectors);

. Distraction leading to or resulting from a two-heads-down situation;

. Failure to resolve ambiguities, doubts or disagreements;

. Failure to effectively monitor the descent progress using all available instrument references (e.g., failure to monitor wind conditions and/or wind changes); and/or,
　
中國航空網 m.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：Descent Management Descent and Approach Profile Management(4)