Mr. 0^2:
To perform a conventional landing or a short rolling landing or a roll until something stops you landing, one doesn't try to level the aircraft with respect to the surface on final approach. Instead, the nose is pitched up somewhat. The higher the angle of attack on final approach, the less kinetic energy the aircraft's center of mass will have at touchdown, other things being equal. Why? Because both lift and drag increase as aoa of the lifting airfoils increase, until stall.
This is the case whether the aircraft is CTOL or a Harrier or an F-35B.
The point is, one doesn't use thrust vectoring merely to push the aircraft upward or backward, if the goal is a minimum kinetic energy rolling landing. In addition, some thrust vectoring should should be used to rotate the airplane to a higher aoa than could be achieved without thrust vectoring.
The question is, can this attitude control be done without automation?