They didn't "design an unstable aircraft". They modified pyons and added larger engines. Their modeling didn't suggest any adverse effects. Once in flight test, some unexpected pitch behavior was noted ony at high AOAs.
I think Wlederling was particularly taken by your idea that Boeing engineers had not expected a change in pitch behavior. Perhaps they are only qualified to design horse drawn buggies?
Strangely, I seem to have more faith in their design team.
I believe their modelling did suggest adverse effects; basically once they had moved the engine forward it was a no-brainer.
Consequently Boeing introduced MCAS with a 0.6deg limit of action.
Then, once in flight test, this was found to be insufficient and they increased it to 2.5deg. (equivalent to maximum deflection in two iterations)
What do you have to support your version?
Well I guess neither of us have those links.
Except... tough luck for you; I found my original link because I actually had one all along and wasn't just inventing facts to suit an agenda.
This Seattle Times article not only supports everything I said above, it also undermines everything you claimed. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/b ... 0Usl53CXMA
The point being that all the .....accusations don't seem to be founded by any real evidence that I've seen. Lots of accusations without any substance.
You got that bit dead right.
Unless you can now magic up an article to support your points...... and we all know that isn't going to happen.
Nothing to see here; move along please.