“This is management driving too hard and engineering not admitting they cannot solve the problem.”
I have no first hand knowledge of the situation. If you do, then I take what you say as true. I’m just going by the hiring practices I see around me in an unrelated industry. When you hire based on group membership first, and qualifications second, you get second rate output.
Airbus announced the A320Neo series of more fuel-efficient aircraft.
Boeing needed a competitive product.
Boeing had 2 choices: 1) Design an entirely new aircraft -or- 2) Modify the current 737NG
Choice 1 would mean a new “type-rating” that requires pilots to be trained specifically for that aircraft.
Choice 2 would mean existing 737NG pilots could fly the 737Max
Southwest Airlines (who only uses 737NG jets) wanted the second choice so it did not have to requalify pilots for a new aircraft type...a high cost per pilot. It also means you have different pools of pilots that fly different aircraft.
Airbus was collecting orders for the A320Neo while Boeing was lagging. Management pushed to use the current 737NG, install the more fuel efficient engines and utilize a computer to compensate for the differences even though the 737NG still uses hydraulics and direct cable linkages for flying.
The 737Max became a Frankenstein of computer control and manual control.
Pilots were not informed properly that the computer had the ability to put the plane into an unrecoverable dive.
That is what happened.