The reason they didn't want to raise the fuselage was to pretend it was actually a 737 and not a completely different plane, so that they could avoid all the testing required. If they'd just built it properly in the first place...
There was no way to raise the fuselage. That would require longer landing gear with no space in the wings to retract it, so it required new wings, leading to re-certifications of both the planes and the pilots and the associated costs.
This grand-fathering of 737 is the reason it still does not have fly-by-wire in 2024: it simulates the antique original 737.
In retrospect maybe they should have based the MAX on the 757. It's more or less a stretched 737 with longer landing gear. Sounds perfect for installing those enormous engines.
Does putting bigger engines more forward really have less impact on certification and training than higher landing gear and wings to fit them? Couldn't the effect of those wings have been corrected in a way similar to MCAS?
Or was misleading people on the invasive nature of the changes always the point? And MCAS is easier to hide than new wings?
> This grand-fathering of 737 is the reason it still does not have fly-by-wire in 2024
The 737 does not have fly-by-wire? Then how does MCAS work?
