Narrative:

We were executing the RNAV 22L in lft at night in heavy rain and thunderstorms due to the glide slope being out of service. We had initially briefed and planned on the localizer 22L but due to the time of day; ATC informed us he had limited radar coverage and we would need to either execute the full procedure for the localizer (including a course reversal into the weather) or else begin the RNAV from a waypoint he could provide vectors to. He was able to get us vectors to the fawp [final approach way-point] so we elected for the RNAV.we briefed and set up the RNAV with no complications. All indications on the approach were in line with what we expected to see. We followed the vpi [vertical path indicator] with navigation data backup both of which indicated we remained within 20-30 ft of the desired vertical path throughout the approach. When we broke out at about 800 AGL there was heavy rain; but we were very high. I lowered the nose to regain what I thought was the appropriate visual glide path; but the rain distorted what I thought was a normal path. We recovered the path and landed on [runway] 22L.the threats were numerous. The airport has had the glide slope out of service for some time; there was limited radar availability for ATC; it was at night; in rain and thunderstorms and it had been a long duty day. In addition; we were rushed due to the approach change and trying to determine the best route through the weather. The other obvious threat was that the RNAV vpi did not descend us to a point from which we could make a normal approach and landing.after landing I immediately wished that I had executed a go around even though there was significant weather. We followed an unsafe aircraft state and allowed the weather to push me into a bad decision by continuing an unstable approach at night; in poor weather. I have learned a very valuable lesson from this situation and will not compromise my situation in the future. The reality is; the only thing that led to an unsafe condition was my lack of leadership in continuing an approach that I knew I should've aborted as soon as I realized [we] were out of position. I allowed the threat of weather force me to land because in my mind at the time; the weather was the greater threat. In reality; our unstable condition was the greater threat and we were very lucky that the outcome wasn't different.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: When they broke out high after being forced into a stressful RNAV approach in bad weather due to ATC limitations and an out of service glide slope; the flight crew of an E135 opted to make a steep; unstabilized descent to land in lieu of performing a go around and remaining airborne in the inclement conditions. The reporter remonstrated himself over the decision to do so despite landing safely.

Narrative: We were executing the RNAV 22L in LFT at night in heavy rain and thunderstorms due to the glide slope being out of service. We had initially briefed and planned on the localizer 22L but due to the time of day; ATC informed us he had limited radar coverage and we would need to either execute the full procedure for the localizer (including a course reversal into the weather) or else begin the RNAV from a waypoint he could provide vectors to. He was able to get us vectors to the FAWP [Final Approach Way-Point] so we elected for the RNAV.We briefed and set up the RNAV with no complications. All indications on the approach were in line with what we expected to see. We followed the VPI [Vertical Path Indicator] with NAV DATA backup both of which indicated we remained within 20-30 FT of the desired vertical path throughout the approach. When we broke out at about 800 AGL there was heavy rain; but we were very high. I lowered the nose to regain what I thought was the appropriate visual glide path; but the rain distorted what I thought was a normal path. We recovered the path and landed on [Runway] 22L.The threats were numerous. The airport has had the glide slope out of service for some time; there was limited radar availability for ATC; it was at night; in rain and thunderstorms and it had been a long duty day. In addition; we were rushed due to the approach change and trying to determine the best route through the weather. The other obvious threat was that the RNAV VPI did not descend us to a point from which we could make a normal approach and landing.After landing I immediately wished that I had executed a go around even though there was significant weather. We followed an unsafe aircraft state and allowed the weather to push me into a bad decision by continuing an unstable approach at night; in poor weather. I have learned a very valuable lesson from this situation and will not compromise my situation in the future. The reality is; the only thing that led to an unsafe condition was my lack of leadership in continuing an approach that I knew I should've aborted as soon as I realized [we] were out of position. I allowed the threat of weather force me to land because in my mind at the time; the weather was the greater threat. In reality; our unstable condition was the greater threat and we were very lucky that the outcome wasn't different.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.