I had an experience in the S-67 that “ sorta “ influences my attitude toward the underlying subject:
On tour in Germany 1972. It was our standard demo ride to demo and then coach, the pilot receiving the demo to do a spli-S and a roll. We would show the guest pilot the maneuver, with them on the controls with us, having given them an airborne brief on what to do. Neither one was particularly demanding.
One day I was flying with an Oberst, who had survived the war having flown the JU-87 Stuka. Pretty strong man, with large shoulders etc. Because of where we were at the time, I decided to have him experience the roll maneuver first. Slight descent, nose down, about 70%Q, to about 160-170. Pull up tp 10-15 degrees nose up ( anything was fine ) hold that pitch attitude and when the speed bled off to 140 or lower ( again anything was fine ) put the cyclic on the right stop and load it until the world became right side up again and center it.
Well this pilot was doing fine, except that as we got to the 180 degree attitude, something clicked in his mind and he started a split S, i.e., he centered the cyclic and started it rearward. Would have been OK except we were at 6-700 ft and at that altitude, had not nearly enough space to do the pullout in the vertical plane. It took both of my hands on the cyclic to overpower my guest, and then it was close, as he stayed on his purpose.
Point I’m making is that active controls do not resolve everything just by configuration.
BTW, had a chance to give a ride to Adolf Galland, and he flew those maneuvers ( never having seen an S-67 before ) as if he had been out practicing in the 67 for hours. Amazing pilot.