The report will tell you precisely nothing about the real causes of this accident - they are lost forever.
If you acknowledge that the causes are indeed lost forever, why are you so tenaciously pushing others that knew him for exactly those causes which you say are impossible to ever discover?
All I have is a question. That's it. It's very simple: why would you leave a perfectly good, very long, superbly equipped runway to head off for another, some 20-odd miles away, with a major failure?
There is possibly a second question, which would be, why, when a second problem became apparent, or it became clear that there was going to be a problem reaching Bankstown, was a decision to make a forced landing not made while there was sufficient height to get it done successfully?
Exactly what answer are you hoping to receive?
You say yourself we'll never know the answer to those questions, yet you persist with it. I think the people here feel more that you're simply making an attack on his character.