A lovely dismissive series of post there FDR without actually adding anything to the thread other than a level of maths that most pilots really don't care about.
Test pilots don't usually talk in pilot language, they usually lecture in engineer degree maths-speak, but Nick and Shawn were different in that respect - maybe you could try that.
Should I tell a pilot who is trying to fly us into the ground to remember his Fourier transformations and flapping harmonics or just get him to pull back on the cyclic?
You are very welcome.
If something is being added that has a potential to impact the operation of some young driver, it should be supportable if represented as fact, otherwise it adds to the mass of uncontrolled anecdotal wisdom. You have more than enough operational experience to add to the knowledge base, people read your commentary, are you sure you are happy with the accuracy of your recent post:
The disc can't flap to equality when the cyclic position prevents it from doing so. Doesn't mean it isn't trying to.
as written does it not contradict the equations of motion of the rotor? The flapping motion of the rotor is independent of the cyclic input. It may be a language issue as to what is being described, so if you are able to describe how the statement works in practice you will find a receptive audience.
P.S.: I did a bit of proof reading of Shawn's work, so I do agree in your view in that area. Shawn was a kindly and capable guy to go fly with or spend time with. His passing in June 2021 was another loss to the industry.