Pathfinder-X said:
But one thing always bugs me is that Russia systems are well known for their simplicity, why would it be harder to maintain than Western counterparts?
Simplicity of design does not always translate into simplicity of maintenance or reliability of components.
An F-16 maintenance crew can remove and replace an engine in under one hour! This was deemed necesary because the engine type meant low hours between overhauls.
When Boeing switched over to CATIA, a simulated maintenance man was created, known as "CATIA Man". First used on the 777, CATIA man had to be able to perform every maintenance task on the AC. He had to be able to reach all the fasteners, fit into the spaces allowed, etc. before the design was approved. This allowed Boeing to test and refine all of the various maintenance and assembly procedures before the first forging ever hit the mill table.
This is just something we are very good at, and it translates into shorter down times, better planning wrt availability of spares and manpower, fewer AOG jobs, and a more efficient system of maintenance overall. This saves money because in the long run, fewer AC are needed to do the job; they are sitting on the flight line instead of in the depot.
