Simon,
Actually pilot normally has very good authority over rotor pitch and roll rates. The problem is that the rotor is connected to airframe by a single point (which pulls heli to new vector), or at best bt a weak spring (known as effective hinge offset). This leads to the fuselage following the rotor through a low pass filter, the time constant being reduced as the hinge offset goes up. This is why bearingless rotors provide a much snappier response to teetering.
Padfield no doubt discusses flapback, which causes the dynamic instability, and pitch roll coupling, which makes hingeless rotors feel marginal. Pilot controlling pitch and roll through an underdamped spring (as Nick suggests) is probably the best way to model the dynamics. I have only the R22 as a basis of evaluation (ie no significant cross coupling, and tail rotor at CG height), but this seems about right.
Any roll/yaw coupling would depend of CG position wrt rotor, which in teetering hover will be in line.
Last edited by Graviman; 8th Dec 2007 at 12:04.