[Vince]

Hi @David Cutler , I was going to join the webcast but unfortunately was out all day yesterday – I missed MCR too!!!

The points that you have made are all applicable here too along with a few others: –

1. Designers should be made to check the scales on their drawings again before issuing. I would estimate that 20-30% of the site layouts I see have the wrong scale in the title block.

2. As you have noted before, scale bars should be included on all drawings. I am fed up with having to calibrate a drawing using a ‘standard’ road width or parking bay. As with my first point though, these need checking before issuing as I recently have found some of these to be wrong.

3. Revisions should always be clouded if a comment such as “Amended to client’s requirements” is going to be used in the title block.

Obviously, we have the major issue here of how drawings are named, etc so I won’t go into that again.

Another regular thing I come across is where a site layout is split over multiple drawings. It is obvious that there are master layouts but trying to get an engineer to issue these can be a nightmare.

We’ve even had engineers refusing to issue the .dwg drawings on a contract that we’ve won – even though we needed them for uploading for setting out purposes.

With regards your point about not being able to turn layers on and off, a drawing with too much data on it can be just as useless as one with too little.

What really confuses me is that the client has paid for the drawings so surely it should be up to them which drawings are issued and to what quality.

And that is my rant over too. 🙄