Originally Posted by
tucumseh
It can't all be down to downsizing and savings.
Well in the case of the MAX it certainly was down to savings.
Quite simply, Boeing tried to make the 737 more fuel efficient by fitting a 2.5 metre diameter engine to an airframe originally designed for, and fitted with a 1.25 metre diameter engine. MCAS came about to avoid redesign/recertification and huge savings in training costs to their clients allowing Boeing to knock $1 million off the list price of each aircraft. Once the MCAS route was decided upon, further savings were made by including virtually no redundancy, altering trim logic and setting up a massive ‘gotcha’ which claimed 346 lives.
This was very much about making savings, as the technology and skills existed for a better solution but were simply not chosen.