×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

FEMA Quck-2 Outcry?

FEMA Quck-2 Outcry?

FEMA Quck-2 Outcry?

(OP)
Has anyone else experienced the frustration of trying to use FEMA's Quick-2 modeling program? I suppose the answer is yes and you would recommend that no one ever use it. Which brings up my question; why isn't there any discussion, frustration or outcry to be found? Nowhere could I find a discussion about how to work around the software's many issues. I looked here on Eng-Tips Forums and found 3 threads as only passing comments.  

Before you jump in with your, "just use HEC-RAS or HEC2" comments, please realize that Quick-2 is being pushed by government agencies as an acceptable solution to determining Base Flood Elevations in Special Flood Hazard Areas. I recently attended a class put on by the local Floodplain Manager and they RECOMMENDED using Quick-2. This program is absolutely horrible and virtually unusable. Why isn't there outcry that FEMA has released this defective product as a tool to determine BFEs for a National Flood Insurance Program (multi-billion dollar program)? Am I way off base expecting the consulting community to be up in arms when this directly impacts the health safety and welfare of the public? Any thoughts?

Thanks,

RE: FEMA Quck-2 Outcry?

I have never been pushed to use quick-2 and I believe very little if any of the work we do for FEMA has used quick-2. There is no outcry because any competent engineer should have a better free tool and long ago realized that quick-2 stinks.

RE: FEMA Quck-2 Outcry?

(OP)
(@cvg) That's an interesting perspective. The regulatory agency creates software that doesn't work and the engineer that attempts to use it is considered incompetent. By the way I did mention not to bother with a "just use something else" response (for future reference).  I'm not asking if there is something else better to use. My question is why does FEMA still distribute this software if it doesn't work or "stinks"?

RE: FEMA Quck-2 Outcry?

the federal government has over the years developed a lot of different software with the hope that it could at some point be useful to the general public. as with many government run and managed programs, this has not always been entirely successful due to many different things including

1) lack of funding
b) lack of experience developing software
i) poor management of tax payer resources.

I believe most have long ago realized that HEC-RAS is a far better tool for open channel hydraulic analysis and don't waste much time on other tools. I'll leave it up to you to determine why the government would waste time and money promoting Quick-2...

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources