Hacker News Reader

After employing various PEs on various aspects of new buildings, I can't say I'm surprised. Never a straight answer when a convoluted one is available. Never a helpful creative suggestion. Rarely a thought for the needs of the end user. Rarely a plan drawing that clearly explains what contractors are supposed to do. Even worse, never a clear answer to the questions inevitably inspired by those inadequate drawings.

View on HN

Yes, and (disclaimer: this is part of my job) often structural engineers have a very "narrow" view which summed up with the (as well often "narrow" views) of the architects, of the plant engineers and of other technicians/designers that are involved in a project create the need of a coordinator/facilitator that helps in the communication among these people, checks the (sometimes not-so-obvious) possible conflicting parts of the various drawings and "translates" the design for the contractor.

Particularly lately I have seen an increase of (otherwise very good, smart and qualified) engineers and architects with no or very little on-site experience, that produce beautiful and valid drawings/designs that cannot be "as they are" realized in practice.

Agree. Seems a PE should be required to have a few years experience in the construction field before they are licensed. So much friction in the process would be avoided if the professionals writing and drawing the instructions for a structure had actually performed the work, or physically seen day to day challenges prior to having responsible charge. Structural engineers would be less arrogant as well. I see this happening on a daily basis.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com