Date: 201303
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: IND.Airport, IN
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-11
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class C IND
ATC / advisory: Tower IND
Second aircraft: Airbus Industrie Undifferentiated or Other Model
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Workload; Other / Unknown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Primary problem: Environment - Non Weather Related

Narrative: As the aircraft was leaving 1;000 FT AGL we were stable even thought we were in VMC conditions and on a visual for [Runway] 23L. We were left high by Indy Approach for a visual. [We were] 4;000 FT on base; as the First Officer aggressively descended to get on the glideslope. We were told by Approach that our spacing looked good with the Airbus ahead of us. 5 mile space is what we were told. [We] contacted Tower [and] checked in with Tower; cleared to land. Winds at the time were variable at 3 KTS. As we left 1;000 FT AGL on glideslope we had gotten some of the wake turbulence from the Airbus because we had gone below on the glideslope est. 1 dot but we started to bounce around more than normal [because of] some wake turbulence. After the First Officer corrected for that with power a fairly large amount of power we got another sinker around 300 FT AGL. [First Officer added] another large amount of power as the airspeed jumped around -5/+15 KTS. At this point I should have stated 'Go-around'. But the bouncing had stopped and we were [continuing the approach]. At [around] 75-50 FT AGL [First Officer added] another large amount of power and we landed with a 0.0 G and 3.9 pitch.More than once I was assuming with the weather and winds that what we were encountering would be brief as with most wake turbulence. To be honest I don't think my mind was accepting what my eyes were telling me. Things got crappy; then ok; then crappy; then ok. The First Officer and I debriefed to great detail in a very professional manner and we both realized we should have gone around yet neither one said it. The runway is right there; things are getting better; let's land. I have come from this with the understanding that I am going to be MORE aggressive with my decision making. Things get crappy; GO-AROUND! BE READY TO GO-AROUND. Just because the weather is good and you've made this landing a hundred times. I will always brief go-around when it's crappy. This was a picture prefect day and you just never would have thought about it. I have always taken great pride in being standard; being aware; and following the Flight Operations Manual always. I feel I dropped the ball I've learned from my mistakes.


Second narrative: Lessons learned: This could be prevented by the decision to go-around when any abnormal atmospheric condition is causing the aircraft not to perform as expected or become 'unstable' in any manner. In addition I will brief a go-around in my approach brief so all crew members are prepared for the possibility of this even in favorable ATIS conditions.


Synopsis: MD-11 flight crew reported wake vortex encounter landing at IND in trail of an Airbus. Crew reported they should have executed go-around; but landed instead.