Old Fokker wrote:
One tiny issue though which I understood differently: "it seems that the airplane first hit the ground outside of the landing strip, on the service route just adjacent to it" is what you wrote. I don't think the term 'service route' is accurate. I believe that what was stated is 'the strip of ground' adjacent to runway 36L. If that is commonly designated as 'service route' then I apologize but I believe it can be confused with the road which runs parallel to the runway.
Old Fokker,these are not my words but a quote of another forumite post. I fully agree with your view.
You also state:
...I'd add is the question regarding the tail-cone. The CAIAIC confirmed that it is the entire section after the pressurized bulkhead which was separated.
I agree that is what the board stated. They are however being imprecise. I am familiar with that airframe and:
It is the actual composite tailcone that the board was referring to as first detached, because:
The area of the fuselage aft of the pressure bulkhead comprises the main fin support bulkheads together with horizontal and vertical stabilizers. The latter can be observed lying next to the main crash site and could not therefore have detached from the airframe on first impact.
As to you having done the transcript work... that is what I was envisioning (and trying to avoid) when I stopped in the middle of watching the video and posted (#1012)
I am viewing it now and will report anything significant in English in about one hour.
Sorry it did not get to you in time, cos I know it was a time-consuming task!