The first criticism may place the crash point for AF447 a little closer to the first location for recovered debris. Let's look at Takata's picture of the current profile in the area. Deep red is highest and deep blue is slowest
Please take note of the blue band at about 50 meters depth. From about 10 meters depth to 40 meters depth the speed of the current falls by about half.
Initially bodies sink, a bit. This depends on the water temperature per other observations here. Or they may have been released from a sinking broken fuselage and floated in that band. They may not have been at the surface all that time. They certainly were not seen even though the initial air searches did cover the areas they'd be expected. Thus would fit with the bodies being submerged below 20 meters for their seven days under water.
I'd also question any assumption that the second band of fast current, the one at 100 meters, is going in the same direction as the surface current. The region of slower current may be due to a sheer region between currents running different directions. Getting a direction profile for the surface, 50 meters depth, and 100 meters depth would certainly help prove the contentions made about final crash site.
The second criticism comes from presuming that the plane was still on course to 0214. The last reported position was 0210. Shortly thereafter the pilots could have instituted their turn, willing or not. The last position the plane was known to be controlled well enough to keep the SatCom antenna pointed was 0214. I would hazard the presumption that the plane became uncontrollable to the extent that the SatCom antenna software was no longer able to point the antenna.
So Takata might look into scenarios which might have a turn starting any time between 0210 and 0214 as well as have less time moving under control after 0214.
I do not expect a dramatic change from Takata's conclusions. But I do expect some change based upon examining both the above factors.
JD-EE