Or one could speculate that if the exact circumstances that led to the crash had occurred at the correct DH, not at the less than 100 feet AGL the aircraft was at at the time of the go around, would it still have crashed ?
Leaving aside the very poor CRM that had the Captain controlling the power levers with the copilot flying, the crew had no control or advance knowledge of the impending power asymmetry. They did have total control and knowledge of the DH though.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this one.
Finally I would like to make one general point aimed specifically at the newer less experienced commercial pilots reading this thread. Sadly the accident record has many examples of aircraft that crashed after busting minimums even when everything was working perfectly. It is just not worth it......
If I had been presented with an immediate 40 degree left roll but at the decision height with IRVR's of 500/400/400 I would have rejected as I'm sure the crew would have (The fact the crew even commenced the approach with those IRVR's on all 3 occasions is a factor - they shouldn't have), even at 200ft with 40 degree left roll followed by the command to execute the go-around and which resulted in an immediate hard right roll of over 70 degrees I'm pretty sure the aircraft would have crashed, especially with the terrain approaching 17. However that is speculation and as it happened 100ft the consequences were immediate, I agree breaking the DH was wrong of course it is, but to me its a factor in a litany of errors and contributory failings by other parties. But as you said we will have to agree to disagree.