I could not get back below 130kt, in the time available.
There is an advantage of a less efficient airframe, finally 8-)
I can easily shoot an ILS at 150kts in the Arrow, a few seconds idle power will bring me back to max gear extension speed (150MPH, ~130kts). So doing all the configuration 3NM final is no big deal.
There is an advantage of a less efficient airframe
... or of a higher max gear extension speed (140KIAS for me). 
I remember that I once got cleared for the ILS after promising that I will maintain 150KIAS until 2NM. It did work out OK but I wouldn't want to do this in a OVC002 situation...
There are just 3 ways I could recover that situation in the TB20:
come off the glideslope, upwards, till the speed drops to 130, drop the gear, 1st flap, and get the nose down to get back onto the GS from above, or
have a fairly high cloudbase and do some S-turns once visual, or
risk shock-cooling the engine by totally closing the throttle while on the GS (probably OK if one has been previously flying at Vlo and full-rich)
I wouldn't want to do this in a OVC002 situation...
unless you have a very long runway over which to slow down, in level flight at 100ft
Thank you Jason for setting this up on the G1000.
So, in summary, it seems like - with a "proper" GPS ;-) - on an approach like this, the VTF function will draw a line which is at an angle to the final approach course. Thus, when being vectored to final, ATC should vector you onto that leg (not onto the extension of the final approach). Right? Unfortunately, what happened in my case is that clearly I was vectored onto the extension of the final approach (something that apparently GPSes cannot display), not onto the dog-legged intermediate approach. Isn't it called vectors to final after all?
... or of a higher max gear extension speed (140KIAS for me).
The PA46 has a high gear extension speed at 168knots. I tend to use flaps with discretion depending on the profile.
Looking at the Jepp plates for EDDR, one wonders why the extended centreline has a bend in it on RNAV 09.
It is possibly to minimise the portion lying in French airspace.
However the VOR 09 shows a turn over the very bit which they might be trying to avoid with the bend in the RNAV 09.
No radar vectoring area is published.
So this is a mystery. Presumably ATC must have a private chart which includes the MRVA for the whole extended centreline, and a letter of agreement with France on how to operate it all.
Noise abatement is usually the reason for for procedure weirdness. French and German ATC are very well integrated and the FIRs and national borders often do not coincide. Strasbourg Radar handles the Karlsruhe area for example -- you get cleared for the ILS in EDSB by French ATC.
@JasonC regarding post #51
(1) Yours must be the very recent aviation database from Garmin. The one I still run on my PC's G1000 simulator (expired only on April 7th, 2013) still shows this RNAV (GNSS) approach without +VNAV advisories.
(2) The first of screen-shorts in your #51 post shows you at 3000 feet while approximately 1NM north of PETID, heading 135 to intercept the final segment of the approach somewhere past PETID. I trust that when flying in your real aircraft (after accepting (?!) this kind of vectoring "assistance" in IMC) you would vigorously question any instructions to descent to 3000 feet so early ....
(2) The first of screen-shorts in your #51 post shows you at 3000 feet while approximately 1NM north of PETID, heading 135 to intercept the final segment of the approach somewhere past PETID. I trust that when flying in your real aircraft (after accepting (?!) this kind of vectoring "assistance" in IMC) you would vigorously question any instructions to descent to 3000 feet so early ....
Of course, I was simulating the lateral stuff not altitude. I wouldn't accept a vector to that point in practice. I was only answering the question posed as to whether it would do it.
It is a fairly up to date CD from June hence the latest database I suppose.
@what next
Mandated by what regulation? Any other distance to go is as good as the FAF for confirming the altitude, just as with the shortened ILS. Not every aircraft needs a ten mile final for flying a stabilised approach.
Please imagine that you are being vectored to a 6-mile final of the RNAV approach depicted in post #27. Please, describe in detail your actions, including your altitude checks and your management of "automation"....
At the bottom of that approach plate (Saarbrücken RNAV 09) there is a table of distances from threshold versus altitude (for 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7NM) for a three degree "glideslope". When I fly the full procedure or if I am vectored directly to the FAF ("PETID") I will start descent passing PETID (7.6 NM to threshold) at 3500ft. From there on, there will be 6 altitude/profile checks until I reach the minimum.
Being vectored to a 6 miles final - at the lower altitude of 2990 (or 3000...) feet, otherwise it would make no sense - will deprive me of two opportunities to perform an altitude check (because I will miss the 7,6 and 7NM points) leaving me with 4 more checks.
Regarding my actions and managing automation absolutely nothing will change between intercepting at 7,6 or 6 NM distance. I don't even care if my FMS switches to "APP" or not as this is an RNP5 procedure and "TERM" or even "ENR" is precise enough to safely fly it. On my Honeywell FMS I will do nothing different from the full procedure. Select and load the approach. When the system detects that you are about to join the procedure by flying between two waypoints at an intecept angle, no matter which waypoints (in this case the FAF and the runway) the connecting line will turn magenta and can be intercepted in LNAV mode. Even the GPS derived synthetic glideslope (that can not be coupled to FD or autopilot no matter where you join the procedure) will come on. That's why even on visual approaches I like to load the FMS approach. And the "approach cancelled" warning message that you get when modifying the procedure is just a liability thing to protect Honeywell if you continue to fly the approach ...
