Ron & Edna Johns
And as professional pilots we really should be refraining from speculating.
Nonsense, and the fact that this forum exists and thrives shows it.
Many experienced contributors have provided informed, knowledgeable input and insight into the causes and pathways to an accident. Not only should professional airmen not refrain from thinking about and considering an accident but they should do just the opposite of what you are suggesting and fully engage the process if for no other reason than to continue learning. The TAM thread, though it has now run it's course, has shown the great value in such a discussion, and where true, uninformed non-professional speculation occurs, it is winnowed out not by those who would have us all sit on the sidelines to wait for final pronouncements from experts but in the marketplace of ideas and notions where very often such expertise can and does exist. This is, after all, a forum format, ostensibly for professionals and not a judiciary or a formally convened board.
Part of any informal positing of causes involves the examination of available information as I and others are doing, and that includes the weather even though we know from experience that it can vary from the recorded values - that too, is "knowledge" and it does not occur only in these areas - try St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada, on any February evening...
In fact you state,
"The FDR and the airspeed/ground speed parameters, plus any recorded weather parameters from ATC are what's needed."
and I couldn't agree with you more, which is why the METARS have been noted and commented upon.
Absolutely the formal, final report ought to be left to IIC and his/her team but learning does not need to wait, providing opinions and thoughts are supported by the evidence as gathered and known. The whole idea of drawing "academic" diagrams is to help that process and to avoid the path that these kinds of discussions take on other forums where speculation is truly rampant and sometimes even silly.
There is no Monday-morning work here, no "J'accuse", and certainly there is no discussion re Lo-Co operators and safety even hinted at, so please set aside such notions in favour of curiosity. I am keenly aware that the greatest, though by no means the sole arbiter of facts, are the DFDR, CVR and associated ATC, weather, runway and crew data and as this data is slowly made available, it will be examined and again, commented upon.
As for praying for their souls, I could not agree with you more strongly and thank you for saying it again.