Top points out my assumption of having forward airspeed when I talk of recovering by means of maximum use of left pedal. The discussion so far suggests that was not the case at hand or at best minimal forward speed.
The accident report stated the aircraft rolled to a bank angle of 98 degrees. I wonder at what point they measured that and if it was immediately before impact or a bit before that.
As I view the video, I notice the aircraft rolling but also a distinct tuck of the nose with a rotation about the mast (or are my tired old eyes deceiving me?). I wonder at what point recovery was impossible if an application of full left pedal was made? Would the nose have rotated to the right considering the angle of bank and lack of significant forward airspeed?
Or....was the rotation of the nose an attempt to gain airspeed such as in a torque turn but done at too low an altitude?
It would seem natural to me had I been caught in that situation, I would have been trying to level the aircraft with full left and moderate aft cyclic at a minimum and possibly full aft cyclic if I realized I was at or approaching the cyclic stops. I could even imagine a reduction in cyclic if I had hit the cyclic stops. The full application of left pedal would have been the last thing I would have done unless I had hit the cyclic stops.
Am I correct in assuming all that would be appropriate until the pitch angle of the aircraft started dropping below level? After the nose drops, it makes recovery at very low altitude very unlikely?