The interim report says the go around was most probably initiated because of w/s.
Well, “could have been":
One of the probable causes of the go-around decision could have been the 20-knot increase of indicated speed to as much as 176 knots within 3 seconds, which might have been an indication of a windshear.
But then we have:
In the course of the go-around the crew set flaps to 15° and retracted the landing gear.
So not a WEM as defined by Boeing. More a normal GA with max thrust, maybe to get out of the turbulence/shear ASAP. It went OK until:
At the height of 1900 ft (approx. 600 m) after reaching the pitch angle of 18° the pilot flying pushed on the control column, which led to a decrease in vertical acceleration of up to 0.5, increase in forward speed and, consequentially, automatic retraction of flaps from 15° to 10° at a speed of over 200 knots.
Why? Knowing what was on the FMA would help a lot. Then:
The short-term decrease in engine thrust within 3 seconds resulted in decreasing speed and flaps extension to 15°, although the following crew inputs to regain maximum takeoff/go-around thrust led to speed increase and reiterated automatic flaps retraction to 10°. The flaps remained in the latter configuration until the impact.
So, firewall power and pitch over into the ground.
I’m starting to think that it was a complete loss of SA, at least from the PF and the control inputs were almost random. You’re going too fast, so you lower the nose and add power... Doesn’t make sense.