The Argentinian accident invites a lot of interesting comparisons with the original crash. The scale representations of the aircraft as it would appear in flight are a great idea. It is possible to appreciate how difficult it is to estimate bank angle from any significant distance and without a clearly defined reference. Well done.
I am still uneasy at your criticism of the original accident reports. The investigators at the time identified a disconnected aileron cable as the component commanding full right wing down. The aircraft was effectively uncontrollable from this point onwards, so no matter what action the flight crew performed, the crash was inevitable.
It is possible to run thousands of different scenarios through a modern computer and come up with several possible solutions to explain how the aircraft ended up at the final crash position and with the wreckage arranged as found. At the time of the accident, such tools simply didn't exist and imvestigators were forced to rely on experience and rules of thumb to arrive at a conclusion.
So while your scenario may indeed be more accurate in terms of describing the flight path and sequence of events during impact, it doesn't actually serve to improve flight safety, which is the primary purpose of any accident investgation.
I continue to have no doubts whatsoever that the flight crew on that day did everything they could to save the aircraft, but the physical evidence, photographs and contemporary reports do not indicate a nearly successful attempt at belly landing.
That is my interpretation of the evidence, yours is different and backed up by computer modelling and comparison to other incidents. I am happy to accept that what you propose is a possibility but not the most likely probability as to the exact sequence of events.
You have collected a mass of data from various sources and you are now probably the best informed person on the planet with regards to this accident. You are entitled to express your opinion as an expert after all that research and to be taken seriously. The experts who investigated the accident at the time were also doing their best but with the added constraint of needing to find the cause as soon as possible and without the benefit of modern technology. The truth probably lies between both sets of conclusions.
I shall be studying your latest report in more depth over the coming weeks.