Lyman, re, "I don't see the problem." Nor do I, bearing in mind the broader question regarding the availability of the displays which I think is in keeping with the second of the three phases of this accident as outlined in IR3, (p72 - 76).
Re, "Here we are again at WRG. Followed by loss of displays. Comments?"
No, none.
There is nothing in the "WRG" indication in and of itself that is unarguable evidence for a loss of all displays.
Forgive me but we can go back and forth many times, as seen, and I've made my comments and asked my question.
I am entirely open to new information and would change my approach according to such new information but failing that I think it is not complicated pre-apogee, and post-apogee it is largely unpredictable (in the sense of citing cause > effect), in terms of human, aircraft and system performance. One must go where the available evidence leads, using one's experience, background and "sense of things".