Originally Posted by
ST Dog
But the reason for MCAS is a separate discussion from what MCAS was intended to do.
It appears to work fine on the tanker, the difference being the implementation.
And it's not much different conceptually than speed trim.
As for the new engine, it's as sound as any other re-engine. Again, the implementation is another matter.
Had they not been trying to meet customer requirements regarding similarity, many changes could have been made to simplify the task.
(Like taller gear to reposition the engine)
No argument with any of that. I just think that it may make sense to revisit the question of aerodynamic stability in certain corners of the envelope, as JATR suggests. The history of MAX development doesn't leave warm fuzzy feelings about Boeing's assurances wrt matters like that.