Flyover altitude
When the accident happened just in front of my homebase, we fast jet pilots discussed the possible traps of this failed display long hours. That short time after the accident we had no official information available except the location and environment of the nearby accident site. We could look at the crash site when departing visual from our base.
Any pilot of my outfit was familiar with low flying down to 100 feet and up to 540 KIAS in Labrador, and we all agreed that flying an airliner at 100 feet or below over a small airfield at minimum speed was suicidal planing.
We discussed, why the crew even went considerably below that planned altitude and came up with the suggestion, that it might not have been the intention of the crew, but happened due to the perspective of the small little airfield. Flying a visual approach to a small little runway / airfield like Habsheim when being used to bigger airfields and buildings like Basel just minutes before gives the visual illusion of being at a higher altitude above ground than actual. Which raises the question, why the information by the Radar Altimeter was neglected. When you expect in advance that the thing will give altitude warnings you have no intention to obey to (as the intention was to do a visual pass and not one based on inside cockpit information) the information is filtered to zero as non essential background noise by the brain.
This flyover should never have happened, we would never have gotten the permission to execute such a flyover with our jets. In my view all the speculation about possible technical aspects is noise to cover up the fact, that the crew f** ed up badly and didn't register the descent below 100 feet. Only altitude information comes from the Radar altimeter, Captain and FO did neither acknowledge nor react to those warnings.