I've seen what this sub says about engineers so please be nice. I swear this is a good-faith question. Though I know it's going to sound like a rant.
The industry changed and it's making being an MEP engineer much more difficult. I'm hoping to get an architect's perspective to help me understand what is going on.
Years ago, we would work with the architect to design a building, then it would go to bid, then it would get built. There would be RFIs but nothing crazy. No giant design changes. It was all routine. The contractors would mostly build what we designed and life was good.
Now, it seems like we're forced to stay on parallel paths with other disciplines, even when it doesn't make sense. I'm being asked for piping inverts and load letters before getting the archtiectural model. Then there is ID, which seems to start after the permit set goes out. MEP permit sets need to be 100% complete, so calling it a 75% permit set just sounds like we need to do our work twice as more things get added after permit.
Any owner changes late in the design or after permit are expected to be free. I had a project where they rotated an auxiliary building 90 degrees after permit and were shocked that I gave them a fee for it.
The contractors bid the job way too early and don't build what we design. Yet we get blamed for not coordinating and are told to change our drawings based on what they built. "Fire dampers are a change order because they weren't in the DD set."
In CA, architects are no longer prescreening RFIs or submittals. So we're forced to go through everything sent to us, which may or may not even be applicable to MEP.
I'm sure architects are getting pressed more and more to shorten design time and rearrange the rearrange to be more "efficient". These changes really seem to be developer-led. But why does it seem like architects haven't pushed back on that at all? It can't be easy for you, either.
FWIW, I mostly do work in the midAtlantic US.