Amen Brother. You speak the truth.

Not a A300 guy, so forgive my ignorance. This statement about the next point seems like basic FMS 101 stuff. Boeing, airbus (320 flavor), MD - doesn't matter. You need your "to" point to be the one the aircraft would NAV to if you engaged NAV.

From your statement, you sort of make it sound like it would be optional. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your point.

Every aircraft I've ever flown that was equipped with an FMS required a properly sequenced box if NAV was going to be used and was an absolute MUST if VNAV or PROF was in the cards for an approach.

In the A300 at UPS (or any other company), are you saying it is acceptable to attempt a LOC approach (or any non-precision) using a VNAV or PROF descent without sequencing the box properly - you just have to deal with a "gooned up" descent to the MDA?

Airbus LOC/VNAV normally flown with LOC providing the lateral course guidance.
Could be flown in NAV, but that's not how I was trained, just as in theory, an ILS approach could be flown as a VNAV approach with NAV lateral guidance.

In this situation, what I have done in the past is flown the RV in Heading/Select, LOC armed to capture the final course, and the FMS cleaned up to the waypoint in front of my airplane. Once LOC captures and I'm on course, I'd arm Profile and wait for the system to capture the VNAV path.

FMS will show my vertical track error and I can watch it count down to the intercept. If I'm above the path, I have to intervene in some way to make it happen. My technique was to use V/S so I could control the descent rate for minor vertical errors. Slam dunk I'd go for the idle descent & boards or make ATC give me a better vector versus accepting a poor setup

That makes sense and is the way I've always done it (when I wasn't using "dive and drive"). I guess the LOC is the unique scenario since one is using the LOC for lateral and the FMS for vertical - allowing the potential for a pilot to get to the descent point at the FAF without the box sequenced properly.

Are you saying you would arrive at the FAF and use V/S to follow the FMS vertical track to the MDA rather than just engage PROF?

Just to be clear, this is referring to getting where you want to be prior to the FAF? I assume you're saying this idle/boards descent would be in an attempt to recover from a poor vector/descent clearance from ATC?

As a minimum, I'd like to hit the FAF at the recommended altitude. Preferably be at that altitude a couple of miles prior to better control my total energy as I transition into the landing phase of my flight.

For the LOC 18 into KBHM, my preference would be to hit the FAF at 2300'. If I'm at 3500', decision is easy. If I'm at 2500' crossing the FAF and descending, then I'm slightly high and would use V/S to intercept the VNAV path from above---but I'd also be much more concerned with the step down fix of 1380 at IMTOY (Still responsible for it in VNAV, but barring the system exceeding the vertical error limitations on approach it shouldn't be an issue)

The idle\boards would be to get below the path in the 10-15 NM to fly arena....but as early as possible. Both Airbus and Boeing have visual indications of when you're going to level off at the selected altitude, and it's a matter of managing your energy appropriately