LW
I'm writing with some very old notes, I may traipse back a couple years, the notes are not mine, apologies. My understanding is the pilots were without any reliable instrumentation re: AoA. If one is committed to, and experiencing stable cruise flight, attitude is critical when things go bump? Pitch is in there?
Bear, I am questioning what seems to be your substituting attitude instrumentation (artificial horizon) for AoA instrumentation (Angle of Attack indication). Apologies if you already understand what follows.
If I fly with my nose at (for example) 2 degrees below the horizon, and vary the airspeed, AoA will vary. If I keep my airspeed and attitudes within the normal operational range, my AoA stays comfortably away from critical, and I don't stall.
To say the pilots did not have attitude indication (artificial horizon) is not correct. Three displays of the aircraft's attitude are in the cockpit. One is in front of each pilot, and one back up in the ISIS instrument cluster.
That most airliners apparently don't have separate AoA gages does not stop pilots flying day to day airline routes from having an attitude reference: attitude (artificial horizon) is the primary reference instrument in instrument flying.
While AoA is related to attitude ... and AoB ... and airspeed ... and power ... and g load ... and air density ... etecetera), it is not correct to derive from that an AoA gage being the equivalent of an artificial horizon, which is an aircraft attitude (pitch and roll) instrument.