DavidReidUK Wrote
For everyone on board to have been subjected to the same impact forces (in this case vertical deceleration) then it would have been necessary for the fuselage to progressively collapse while maintaining the same nose-high attitude (think of a collapsing chimney). If, on the other hand the fuselage remains rigid and (relatively) intact, then it's more analogous to, say, a golf club or cricket bat striking the ground where one end hits first and the other end then accelerates in an arc to strike the ground with a higher velocity and consequent higher impact force
In fact, a rigid object such as a broomstick or an aircraft falling from a vertical attitude accelerates under gravity at 0 m/s at the base, 9.8m/s/s at the middle '1G' and 2x9.8 m/s/s at the tip '2G'
The length of the 737-800 is 35m, so the time for a simple topple from purely vertical to purely horizontal is 1.87 seconds. If aerodynamics are involved this will obviously increase. Contrary-wise, friction with the ground from the horizontal component of velocity will induce a turning moment to increase the rotation speed in the early stages of impact.
Making up some numbers, say the aircraft had a vertical component of fall of 30 m/s at impact and the impact occurred over 2 seconds, then the mid section would have hit at 30 + 1 * 9.8 = 40 m/s, while the front would have hit at 30 + 2 * 9.8 = 50 m/s.
So in this case, limited by made-up but in the ballpark numbers, the front hit 60% as fast (50 m/s) as the tail (30m/s) and with 2.7 times the energy to dissipate.
Actual FDR data will be different, but I would guess roughly similar values.