Dave, OK so a 21st century Hiller paddle system (with CVJ hub). In this forum i learned that the Hiller system is flawed, because the delay of a teetering rotor means pilot has to think a second or so ahead - pilot is flying the rotor rather than the machine which swings underneath.
An alternative objective might be to give the zero-zero control authority of hingeless rotors to a 2 bladed design. You could achieve this by having a gyro cyclically moved to minimise hub moment vibration (ie moving in opposition to blade cyclic 90' out of phase to blades). So the gyro could simply be put inside the fuselage as a motor driven vibration adsorbing/cancelling device.
IMHO the whole setup is too complex unless the benefit is improved pilot machine interface. Lockheed got closest to ideal for a mechanical only solution, using a hingeless rotor. The achilles heel was the blade flap feedback via the pitchlink, needed to stop roll towards retreating side (blades were forward swept). This pitch feedback does not suit modern aerofoils, while its removal would result in some control asymmetry. Maybe a small amount of hub compliance would allow flapback to trim gyro directly (without risk of control divergence).
I can see why SAS systems have developed the way they have...
Mart