That's my point - if the designers had specified that the powerplant could be split down and then the decks opened up to allow the parts be removed then the extra expense of having to dismantle half the ship to get the faulty/poorly specified engine out. Just my opinion, in fact a audit should be undertaken to find out who approved the design, then hauled over the coals, place the blame squarely at the feet, it could be that the penny pinching accountants had their say and hence went against common sense.
As an example - and this was found to be the case in most of the companies we dealt with - an engineer of a corporate business asked us to supply a quote for a replacement centrifugal fan that had been running in the process plant for niegh on 15 years (it also was one of ours), the process had been upgraded for a greater throughput and the existing fan was seeing some wear and physically had some patching work done to it, the cost of the fan was £2126.00 for a higher throughput the same spec (gauges) and a more efficient motor (ie3 was just becoming available for certain motor sizes that fitted in with the new fan), so it would be more cost efficient on its running costs.
The engineer received the quote and did a search online (by his own admission) to see if there was anything cheaper for the accounts department to compare against, he found a fan by kongskilde that was just at the specs he had costing about £1000.00, the accounts went for that, why because the cost of the K fan was £1000.00 in the yearly budget and he justify that and ours was £2126.00, over twice that.
But if you look at it from a engineers view - our fan was able to run more efficiently at 2/3 the cost of the K fan, had spare capacity of at least 15%, had of a thicker gauge - 5mm, so in theory would have lasted a minimum of 5 years before needing a repair or even patching or even a replacement impeller (remember the original had been going for 15 years at least and only needed replacing due to the extra throughput required, the K fan was 1mm thick steel and would probably have worn through in just over a year and would require replacing, but the as far as they were concerned, they had saved £1126.00, but if you look at it logically, they would have broken even with ours after 2 years and be making a saving of £1000.00 + yearly increase, every year after that not including the power saving.