I am interested in your argument that a smaller, lighter aircraft will be more maintainence friendly? Would you care to expand?

Not more easier to maintain but what I said was that a smaller aircraft is more inclined or has better chance to meet its goals as far as structural eff., weight and other goals are concerned. This in my opinion is due to the compllexity and its relative increase as size increases. My argument isnt with the size difference of the 787 and XWB but with just a a normal case where 2 aircrafts are being developed (not necc similar size) . As far as 787 is concerned it is running into weight issues . The last time I talked to my source it had reduced the overweight by .4- . 6 % and is now close to 2% over-weight with much of that weight increase being in the wings . The japanese sub contracters are working overtime to reduce those wing weights by enough so that other components can make up for the total weight . Even at current weight levels it is well within its range of weight which was quoted to the Airlines and would still offer 20% effeceincy even if no more weight is trimmed (it could have been close to 3% overweight and still offer the same level of effeciency as was quoted by boeing) . I guess this is why boeing is able to exceed its design requirments cuz they are not very optimistic going into a program.