Awol57
The way I see it is that separation must be established and maintained as the transition is made from one separation standard to another.
As runway separation, IMHO, never existed, it is difficult to argue that any other standard existed until the two tracks diverged at about 9:16:28
The event occurs from about 9:15:59 which is the first time both aircraft appear on the WebTrack display, to 9:16:28 which is when track divergence occurs.
The aerodrome elevation is 21' AMSL. WebTrack altitudes may well be incorrect, but relatively to both aircraft, should be accurate enough.
At 9:15:59 the C25A is possibly airborne at 98' with VOZ 511 passed the runway threshold at 354' and 400-500m behind.
This is not runway separation, the first standard that needs to be applied.
From 9:15:59 to 9:16:17 I believe there may possibly be visual azimuth separation from the Tower, but it won't last long. The C25A is below VOZ511 by 60-100', and 300-400m ahead. Not being a B738 pilot, I don't know if an aircraft is visible from the cockpit in this position i.e. below and between 1100-1130 o'clock. The C25A pilot has no way of seeing or knowing the position of the other aircraft. So relying on pilot participation during this fairly critical phase, is problematic.
From 9:16:17 to 9:16:28 visual azimuth separation from the Tower is not sustainable. VOZ511 is still above the C25A, and still within 400m and with very little angular distance between them from the Tower.
In my experience, this would not be enough to claim "visual separation". (The favourite catch call)
There is no visual separation, vertical separation, radar separation or any other type of separation as I see it.
Also, IMHO and in hindsight, I think it is safer for the B738 to land because it is a close situation that won't get any closer.
With both aircraft in the air, it's a close situation that gets closer until they end up diverging.