- Jan 17, 2010
- Reaction score
- Corindi Beach
I'm sure they did but economics is a powerful voice. Below is part of a report published today.Totally agree Yenn, there must have been a fair number of people involved with the engineering, surely a few would have raised concerns.
To understand how Boeing has found itself in this predicament, it pays to get familiar with the story of the 737's direct competitor, the Airbus A320.
In 2010, the European manufacturer announced plans to create a new version of the aircraft, the A320neo (short for "new engine option"), which promised airlines greater fuel efficiency at a time when the Boeing 737 models in service — the Next Generation series launched in 1993 — could not compete.
So, a race quickly ensued after Airbus fired the starting gun.
At this point, Boeing found itself at a crossroads: make a new version of the 737 from scratch or retrofit the existing Next Generation series with newer technologies.
Boeing went with the latter, which meant that an existing 737 frame was fitted with larger, more fuel-efficient engines that altered its aerodynamics in a way that made it prone to tilt up during flight.
Boeing engineer and cockpit designer Rick Ludtke told the New York Times that the 737 MAX's designers were told they "could not drive any new training that required a simulator".
"They wanted the minimum change to simplify the training differences, minimum change to reduce costs, and to get it done quickly," he told the paper.