skwinty,
The complexity of finding an appropriate spot for the static port, and the remaining errors due to changes in speed, angle of attack and sideslip, may be seen here:
http://www.spaceagecontrol.com/nasa-tm-104316.pdf
You ask: "What will confirmation of the calibration data prove? "
We are interested only in errors due to excessive speed. We are pretty sure that the discrepancy between the radalt altitude and the pressure altitude is due to excessive speed, and that speed being outside the calibration envelope for the plane. To be "pretty sure" is one thing, but to have documentary evidence is another. The calibration data would go to some speed and no further. Beyond that speed, no one can know what the errors would be. If we had the calibration data we would "know" to what speed the calibration was done, and we would "know" whether or not the plane was flying in an uncalibrated region.
MurphyWasRight,
You ask whether the time delay between recording the radalt and the pressure altitude could have caused the discrepancy. The pressure altitude is recorded in words 29 and 30, and the radalt is recorded in words 31 and 32, thus they are 2 words apart. Each word takes 1/256 th of a second so these readings are only 7.8 milliseconds apart. No significant error would be possible from that cause. Good thought though.