Excuse me sir, but even the impeccable logic applied to false premises cannot result in conclusion that is true by anything else but by a chance.
I'm unable to find explicit reference to the specific accident in your posts but if you are referring to USAir A320 Hudson ditching when writing about "RAT deployed to provide crude control" and "observing servailance video showing a low AOA impact" then your notions, while possibly logical, are factually very incorrect. RAT did not deploy. Control law remained normal until water contact. No hydraulic or flight controls fault was recorded. All main electric busses remained powered. Finaly, attitude at touchdown was 10° ANU, very near manufacturer's recommendation of 11° and definitively inconsistent with idea that low AoA splashdown was achieved.
My apologies if you were referring to something else.