We probably can't make sense of the ping derived solutions as the complete data set has not been made available. Even the full data set produces multiple possible solutions (or if you prefer, wide confidence intervals around the average solution).
You have to admit this incident was well planned. Lots of things we do know about were too well timed to be coincidence eg the plan started at FIR boundary, late at night when military unlikely to respond in time, no moon ....
No reason to expect the bits we don't know we're not also well planned.
What sort of solution do you get if you make the flowing assumptions
1. High speed lowish level until across peninsula and out of primary radar. This is the highest risk part, so speed and low level make sense. You would not loiter while within primary radar coverage.
2. Ditch or crash at fuel exhaustion (minimal slick).
3. Assume flight ended close to TIME of last complete ping, and final incomplete ping was related to crash itself.
4. Crash WHERE it was dark or perhaps first light at time of final ping. Need some light if plan to ditch (minimal debris??), although this constraint isn't relevant for a high speed crash.
5. Close to 40 degree arc - although I don't think we don't know the rounding error associated with 40.
Does this produce any sort of coherent solution?