A couple of observations...
The photos posted on page 4 of the thread are of very good quality and give away much detail....
1- The aircraft was in the landing configuration with full slat deployed.
2- The debris field is quite small, the Stbd. engine has come to rest only a few metres ahead of the fuselage suggesting very low forward speed at impact. This is supported by the (relatively little) rearward fuselage distortion in the radome and E+E bay area.
3- The heavy fuselage shear forward of the empennage suggests first point of impact was the tail. The level of vertical forces indicate improbable survival in the last few rows or rear galley.
4- The remainder of the fuselage aft of the forward W/B fairing has absorbed very significant vertical forces to the point where it has parted.
5- The forward section appears to have has suffered greater vertical impact than the mid section. This is witnessed by the hole punched through the roof section by one of the vertical (fwd) galley stanchions that can be seen poking through the roof. This might be due to the mid section experiencing vertical retardation as the main gear absorbed some of the vertical impact... the front section continued earthwards and just sheared off. Survivability therefore would better in the mid section.
6- The first stage fan blades of the engine in view have no radial distortion suggesting little or no rotation at the point of impact.
7- No fire does not mean no fuel
8- Eyewitness reports of the aircraft 'porpoising' on final approach are consistent with a deeply stalled aircraft.
.....I would be very interested to learn how much fuel remained onboard at the time of the accident.