bearfoil, I don't wish to belabor this. On the
AF447 thread if you slog through all 4589 posts you'll find the description of the what some of us think happened. The plane came down with some forward motion. The tail struck first. This forced the tail assembly upwards as well as ripped it to the rear. The plane then belly flopped pivoting to a flatter position before the belly of the plane struck the water.
This may or may not be accurate. But there's an interesting simple experiment you can perform. Take a bog standard 3" by 5" index card (or euro equivalent). Cut one edge of the card to look a little like -\_/---\_/---\_/---. That is to say cut away all but three tabs about half again as wide as your handy paper hole punch. Use that hole punch to punch three holes, one in each tab. Stick some dowels that fit the holes moderately snugly through the card and secure them so that they won't move. Now, pull the index card up and forward. Study the tears where the paper separates. Repeat this for several different movements of the "vertical stabilizer" relative to the mounting points.
Lastly, it is observed that the leading edge of the VS where it meets the body of the plane is damaged, missing. The trailing edge is also damaged. This is consistent with the full tail-cone assembly being forced upwards pivoting around the nose of the VS. You'll find that you cannot duplicate the tears in the VS mounting tabs including the one tab that had portions of the mount still attached, with any form of sideways rip. You can with a forward rip.
Your challenge is to explain that. I simply propose the tail plant with the drag of the tail providing a force converting forward motion into downward motion as well as providing the "prying" action via horizontal stabilizer and tail cone assembly. It's the only scenario my limited mind can find that produces the tears in the VS mounting tabs and leaves part of the mount attached to one of them, the front one if my memory serves.
Try the simple experiment. It's very enlightening.