What I can't understand is why them fenestron manufacturers, after witnessing early Gazelle issues, did not develop a mechanical cam-disk-correlator thingy that translates classical TR-type pedal travel into travel needed by a fenestron, to have exactly the same characteristics as the good ol' TR.
The S-300C pitch-throttle correlator definitely is not a linear thing, hence adapting TR pedal output into adequate fenestron control input can't be rocket science and would have greatly helped acceptance of the fenestron.
I've even see some airbus graphics of pedal travel over anti-torque trust, comparing TR with fenestron, so everyone should know how the translation ought be designed to make a fenestron feel indiscernible from a TR.