What happens when 200 rocket scientists build a car...
 

...in 24 hours. That's why you need car/industrial designers. Lockheed Martin Engineers Build Car In One Day

I was able to access the story, so others might also be able to.

The point is well taken about engineers, however. They design products that are rushed into the marketplace with less than thorough testing. Engineers never have to live with the design flaws (AKA unforeseen consequences) of the stuff they design. They soon move on to their next project while we consumers get to tinker with and try to rectify any design deficiencies that crop up after the product has been in service for a while.

A well engineered vehicle is a pleasure to own, and a "keeper". A poorly engineered vehicle is... :rolleyes:

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm... I don't know if "build" is quite the right word; for sure design isn't. Sounds to me like they assembled a kit car that had a few "issues" thrown in there on purpose.

An exercise in team-work, problem solving, beating the clock, and expanding one's horizons a bit...

It's this car: http://articles.timesofindia.indiati...agement-system

Yep, it's all the engineer's fault.

The salesman executive can't be faulted for promising something that just isn't possible, nor can the bean counter accountant be held at fault for taking an engineered design and shaving off pennies so the company can save $30,000 over the production life of the model. The risk-averse mid-level managers can't be faulted if they turn back the engineering work again and again and again until said work meets the approval of the multi-legged but empty-brained lifeform - known as the committee. Certainly, the big-wigs can't be faulted for lobbying the government to install oh-so-needed safety and emissions regulations that, gee, their company can somehow attain fairly easily while raising the bar impossibly high for start-ups.

Yup, it's all the engineers' fault.

i think the 3 jokers on the show top gear built a caterham super 7 in about 8 hours, and it had head lights.

Oh, there's enough blame to go around, but ultimately someone designed the product, and that task is done by engineers.

Haven't we all worked on a car (or other product) at some time and said "now that's a DUMB design"? Somebody or some team of people designed it...

Some products are engineered well and others aren't. Unfortunately it's often hard to tell what deficiencies will arise in a product before buying and owning it.

The quoted article reveals what the engineering staff at Lockheed did:

Fair enough. When you design and sell something that is oh-so-much better than anything us lowly engineers can come up with, I'll be the first in line to buy it.

Isn't there a saying about a horse designed by a committee? :)

What would you get if advertisers designed a car?

Accountants?

Homer Simpson? :D

No need for engineers to get feathers their ruffled and become collectively defensive, or to take any comments personally. No one but you called engineers "lowly". I respect good engineering. I have disdain for bad engineering. (And please let's not pretend that there are no "bad" engineers - or any bad lawyers, or bad doctors, or professionals of any other stripe in this world.)

Engineers, working for corporations, are paid to design a product. I can decide whether to buy it or not, although in modern times, more often than not, the track record of the product is unproven.

As with all occupations, if you don't do the job of designing it... someone else will. Life may not be fair. But that's life.

BTW, I've always maintained that if a product comes on the market that will actually be useful to me and proven to be reliable, I will be the first in line to buy it. ;)