> I'm sure there's more How about this one: > "The solution was to extend the engine up and well in front of the wing. However, doing so also meant that the c

> I'm sure there's more How about this one: > "The solution was to extend the engine up and well in front of the wing. However, doing so also meant that the centerline of the engine’s thrust changed. Now, when the pilots applied power to the engine, the aircraft would have a significant propensity to “pitch up,” or raise its nose." The centerline of the engine’s thrust moves up, doesn't it (the constraint is the floor, bigger engine requires you to go higher, wings are in the way, so you go higher and forward), so presumably it moves closer to the centre of gravity, giving you a shorter lever, thus full throttle should give you less aircraft nose up momentum. In reality, the issue is (as far as I understand) that the nacelles generate lift that is further out in front of the centre of gravity, giving you a longer lever, and that's what produces a stronger pitch up (under high AoA) than before. EDIT to add: The article mentions that later: > "And the lift they produce is well ahead of the wing’s center of lift, meaning the nacelles will cause the 737 Max at a high angle of attack to go to a higher angle of attack." The relevant property is not that the lift of the nacelles is ahead of the centre of lift, but ahead of the centre of gravity.