Federal Regulators realized the likelihood of a second fatal crash involving the 737 MAX was high but believed telling pilots of the hazard posed by the plane's anti-stall system would be sufficient to assure safe operation of the aircraft, The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday.

The initial review by the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) of the Lion Air crash on Oct 29, 2018, concluded that it wouldn't "take much" for a similar malfunction to result in another crash, the newspaper said, citing an unnamed FAA official familiar with the issue and others briefed on the matter.

The  Indonesian Lion Air jet went down in the Java Sea Oct 29, 2018, killing all 189 passengers. The Ethiopian Airlines crash at Addis Ababa on March 10 ended in the death of all 157 on board.

In a preliminary review of the Lion Air crash, the FAA found that a faulty onboard sensor apparently provided bad information to the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) which pointed the nose of the plane down and into a fatal plunge. The nose of the plane is pointed down to gain speed and to avoid a mid-air stall.

The FAA's analysis determined risks posed by MCAS were high and warranted regulatory action. In the interim, a directive re-stated procedures a flight crew should take to counteract and disable MCAS.

If pilots knew of the risk and knew how to respond if the anti-stall system malfunctioned, regulators believed it would be acceptable to give Boeing time develop a permanent software fix for MCAS.

The FAA sought to "get something out immediately and then mandate something more permanent," the Journal reported.

But an FAA Nov 7 emergency directive didn't mandate design or operational changes. It reminded pilots how to swiftly and correctly respond to an MCAS malfunction. That approach "wasn't removing the risk," the unnamed FAA official told the newspaper, but rather was "making it acceptable for a period based on the data we had."

A Boeing spokesman told the newspaper: "Boeing and the FAA both agreed, based on the results of their respective rigorous safety processes, that the initial action of reinforcing existing pilot procedures...and then the development and fielding of a software update, were the appropriate actions."

"It's a case of the wrong people making safety decisions," James Hall, managing partner of Hall and Associates and former chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board, told China Daily. "I think it goes back to the caveman technology at the FAA and the fact that the agency puts the economic interests of the aviation industry ahead of passenger safety."

On Wednesday, members of a Senate subcommittee clashed with FAA officials, contending the agency was too deferential to Boeing in approving the 737 MAX, according to The Associated Press.

Rhode Island Democratic Senator Jack Reed asked an FAA official about the Journal report. FAA Associate Administrator Ali Bahrami said the agency recognized it was urgent to tell pilots how to disable MCAS.

Boeing has submitted new software to the FAA for review, but there is no schedule for approval.