There is a famous melancholic question in Turkish literature: “Gitmek mi zor, kalmak mı?” (Is it harder to leave, or is it harder to stay?)
In the engineering domain, we can translate this into a fundamental dilemma: Is it harder to design a fighter jet, or to keep it combat-ready for 40 years?
As engineers, we are conditioned to worship the design phase. We celebrate wind tunnels, CAD models, and shiny prototypes. The designers are the architects of the “First Flight”. They build the asset, cut the red ribbon, and then… they leave.
Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) is the discipline of “staying”. While the design teams disband, ILS inherits the system. It is the framework that must live with the asset, mitigate its entropy, and maintain its operational relevance for the next half-century.
Analogy: Event vs. Lifecycle
Designing a complex system is like planning a magnificent wedding. It is stressful, expensive, and requires precision. But the goal is a single, perfect day: The Launch.
ILS is the marriage. It is waking up every day for 40 years with that system. It is dealing with its degradation, its obsolescence, and its unexpected failures in a muddy hangar.
Design implies a perfect world (Ideal Gas Law). ILS operates in the real world with sandstorms, broken supply chains, and technicians who lost their specialized tools.
The Obsolescence Paradox
A designer selects a microchip that is state-of-the-art in 2024. By 2030, the manufacturer ceases production. By 2040, the aircraft still requires that specific architecture to fly.
The designer is long gone. The burden falls on the sustainment engineer to solve this Obsolescence Paradox: reverse-engineering a component older than the pilot flying the plane, often without the original data package.
The 30/70 Cost Reality
The “Iceberg Chart” is a cliché in our industry for a reason. It represents a brutal financial reality:
- Acquisition Cost: ~30% (Design + Production). The visible tip.
- Sustainment Cost: ~70% (Operations + Support). The submerged mass.
We acknowledge this ratio in PowerPoint decks, yet we often proceed to design systems where a $5 hydraulic seal replacement requires dismantling the entire landing gear.
> DIALOGUE_LOG
DESIGNER: “I placed this filter deep inside the fuselage to optimize aerodynamics.”
MAINTAINER: “Understood. The aircraft is now AOG for 48 hours for a 10-minute filter change.”
The Verdict
So, is it harder to leave (design) or stay (sustain)?
Designing requires genius. It is the spark of creation. It answers the question: “How do we make this fly?”
But ILS requires resilience and systemic intelligence. It solves the problem of “How do we keep this operational?” amidst chaos, entropy, and uncertainty.
Designing a plane is a triumph of physics. Keeping that plane combat-ready for 40 years is a triumph of System Architecture.