(Note: throughout this by "CEng level" and "IEng level" I mean meeting the applicable requirements of UKSpec.)
It depends what you mean by "sign off work". Let's take my field, railway safety systems, and a recent example I've been involved in, a new level crossing system for the UK. For the acceptance that the system is ultimately safe to place in service there are maybe three people involved in the sign off (of different aspects), all of whom are at CEng level. For the system design, application design, implementation, planning, supervision of testing (both of the design and the final application), and sign off against specific tasks (i.e. a factual sign off rather than a sign off based on judgement) there are a large number of engineers involved - why should they not be professionally recognised and registered just because they don't have that final sign-off responsibility? Which is the silly position we are in now (since hardly anyone bothers to take up IEng.) (Of course, many of these engineers will be at CEng level, which is fine.)
I personally think it is clear that IEng does apply to engineers who have sign-off responsibility - but where that responsibility is broadly against a known and agreed practice. CEng is (again as I personally understand it) is intended to provide evidence that the holder is competent to take a sign-off judgement in a critical environment where there are significant unknowns.
I disagree slightly with Brian's argument in the thread you link to, as I say I believe that UKSpec is reasonably clear that IEng and CEng can both have sign-off responsibility, but in different circumstances. But (I may be wrong) I don't get the impression that he was trying to draw a distinction between the two here, it was a different argument of (broadly) CEng against nothing at all.
If I had a complex solar panel installation developed for my house I'd be quite happy for that to be signed off by an IEng. When they start mining under my house for tungsten in a year or so I'd rather like a CEng or two to be involved to form that judgement as to whether they've considered all the obscure ways my house could be undermined, but if most of the mining engineers are IEng that's fine by me. And good for them.
(Note: throughout this by "CEng level" and "IEng level" I mean meeting the applicable requirements of UKSpec.)
It depends what you mean by "sign off work". Let's take my field, railway safety systems, and a recent example I've been involved in, a new level crossing system for the UK. For the acceptance that the system is ultimately safe to place in service there are maybe three people involved in the sign off (of different aspects), all of whom are at CEng level. For the system design, application design, implementation, planning, supervision of testing (both of the design and the final application), and sign off against specific tasks (i.e. a factual sign off rather than a sign off based on judgement) there are a large number of engineers involved - why should they not be professionally recognised and registered just because they don't have that final sign-off responsibility? Which is the silly position we are in now (since hardly anyone bothers to take up IEng.) (Of course, many of these engineers will be at CEng level, which is fine.)
I personally think it is clear that IEng does apply to engineers who have sign-off responsibility - but where that responsibility is broadly against a known and agreed practice. CEng is (again as I personally understand it) is intended to provide evidence that the holder is competent to take a sign-off judgement in a critical environment where there are significant unknowns.
I disagree slightly with Brian's argument in the thread you link to, as I say I believe that UKSpec is reasonably clear that IEng and CEng can both have sign-off responsibility, but in different circumstances. But (I may be wrong) I don't get the impression that he was trying to draw a distinction between the two here, it was a different argument of (broadly) CEng against nothing at all.
If I had a complex solar panel installation developed for my house I'd be quite happy for that to be signed off by an IEng. When they start mining under my house for tungsten in a year or so I'd rather like a CEng or two to be involved to form that judgement as to whether they've considered all the obscure ways my house could be undermined, but if most of the mining engineers are IEng that's fine by me. And good for them.
