N52961- It was my comments that you were quoting. For what it's worth, the aerodynamic principles you quoted are right. However, they are not relevant to the comments you were trying to argue against. And yes, I do know what roll rate is. In the future, you might consider looking at the time a fellow has on the site and number of posts he has made before assuming he's a dummy who doesn't know the most basic things about flying.

When I said "fairly neutral handling" I was not talking about a plane on the verge of instability. I was talking about an airframe designed for sport or aerobatics- ie, not a trainer or a a Cub. Any plane with a symmetrical airfoil without significant self-righting characteristics would fit the bill.

And yes, aspect ratio (wing length, for beginner readers) does impact the way a plane handles gusty, turbulent winds. It's just common sense to figure that the longer the wings are (all else being equal) the easier it is for the two ends to be in different wind. Take for example two planes I flew this week: A H9 .40 size Cub, and an original Balsa USA Phaeton biplane. The wind was around 12 mph and a little turbulent. The Cub lurched and tossed, rolling and yawing unpredictably on its own and not wanting to make smooth turns when flown at a scalelike speed. I think it's fun to fly it on days like that, but easy it's not. The Phaeton has a smaller fuselage, much shorter wings, and flies 50% faster with the same horsepower up front. It flew smoothly and did basic aerobatics with only simple wind corrections.