Hopefully you might allow me to join you in your interested reader camp Dave, if only to stop you becoming lonely!
For my part, I am not trying to rewrite or dispute the AAIB report, but simply trying to come up with some sort of rational explanation for what transpired, not because I think it will exculpate the pilot, but because I think it might serve to put his actions into their proper context.
It seems to me that there is a world of difference between someone recklessly flying around wilfully disregarding normal safety protocols, and someone who fails to spot an uncommanded reduction of thrust in time to avail themselves of a 4 second long opportunity to escape safely.
Whilst I am not at the latter end of that spectrum just yet, the more I read, and the more this discussion goes on, the closer I am edging towards it.
Why does it matter? Well, because if it was in truth a technical issue which put the pilot unknowingly into the fateful position, and under pressure he made the wrong call without fully appreciating what had happened, it is hardly a unique scenario. Like everyone else, Pilots are not infallible, and under duress can get it wrong and it is reasonably foreseeable that they might. The tragedy which unfolded has as much to do with the decision to have a display of that type in that place, as it does with what did or didn't happen during the fateful 4 seconds.
In fairness, the AAIB report acknowledges this; it is just the subsequent flow of debate which doesn't seem to. In other words, it is important to understand the context of the pilots actions to set them properly in the overall context.