u/etheri_369

I’m in the later stage of my PhD and honestly struggling to tell whether this is normal PhD pain or just a bad supervision situation.
My project is highly interdisciplinary, involving experiments, modelling, biology, chemistry and computational work. The biggest problem is that my main supervisor doesn’t really understand the technical side of my topic, so I often don’t get useful scientific guidance. Sometimes I’m asked to do calculations that don’t even correspond to anything meaningful scientifically.

I also recently discovered a questionable term in my work that apparently had been added. Somehow this went unnoticed despite the results being checked multiple times by co supervisors.
Now I’m trying to figure out what is actually scientifically defensible, fix problems from previous work, and turn everything into publications, while also running out of time.
I have a collaborator who understands my topic much better. I can actually discuss the science with them and get useful feedback, and honestly they sometimes feel more like my real supervisor than my actual supervisor.
The frustrating part is that I don’t mind working hard. I just need to know that I’m working on the right problem.
Instead, I often feel like I have to first figure out whether the question I’ve been given even makes scientific sense before I can answer it.
At this point I’m wondering: Is this just part of becoming an independent researcher, or is this genuinely inadequate PhD supervision?
Has anyone else experienced something similar?

I’m a few years into my PhD and honestly I’m getting pretty tired of it.
My background is mainly bioprocess engineering, modelling and process engineering. My PhD is multidisciplinary, so I’m also expected to deal with quite a lot of biology/microbiology. I can understand the general biology, but I’m definitely not a deep microbiologist.
My main supervisor is a microbiologist, and this is where a lot of the problems start.
He doesn’t really work in the specific area of my PhD, so when I have technical questions about the modelling or the actual system, I often don’t get much useful guidance. Sometimes I’m asked to calculate things that, after I actually look at the model, don’t really exist as a meaningful quantity in the way I’m being asked to calculate them.
Then I spend days trying to figure out what the hell I’m supposed to do.
I also have a collaborator who understands my actual work much better. I can sit down with him and properly discuss the model, results, assumptions etc. Honestly, he sometimes feels more like my actual PI because at least I can have a proper scientific discussion with him.
There have also been some pretty frustrating things during the PhD where I’ve found issues or inconsistencies in the work/model that apparently nobody noticed before. Some things were already being used or discussed as if they were correct, and then I find out later that there are problems with them.
That has caused setbacks because sometimes I’m not actually moving forward with my research. I’m going backwards trying to figure out whether something I was given or something already in the project is even scientifically correct.
And to be fair, I’m not saying I’m always right.
I get stuck too.
Sometimes I simply don’t know enough microbiology to solve a problem quickly. That’s one of the downsides of doing multidisciplinary research. I’m much more comfortable with process engineering and modelling, so when the problem suddenly becomes very deep biological/microbiological reasoning, I can get completely stuck.
But instead of getting help and moving on, I sometimes end up in these stupid loops with my supervisor where we keep arguing about the same thing without really resolving it.
My biggest frustration is that I don’t feel like I have someone above me who can properly say:
“Okay, this is the scientific question. This is what the model says. This is what the biology says. This is what the data says. Let’s decide what is actually correct and move on.”
Instead, I sometimes feel like I’m figuring out both the research AND how to supervise myself.
And now I’m getting worried because I don’t have unlimited time left. I still need to finish the PhD, publish, and move on with my life.
I’m not even sure what I’m asking here. Maybe I just want to know if other people have experienced this.
Has anyone else had a PhD where their supervisor was basically not an expert in the actual topic they were working on?
How did you deal with being stuck when your supervisor couldn’t really help?
And at what point do you stop thinking “I just need to become more independent” and start thinking “maybe the supervision is actually the problem”?
Because right now I honestly feel like I’m constantly trying to push the research forward while also trying to figure out what the research is supposed to be in the first place.

I’m a few years into my PhD and honestly I’m getting pretty tired of it.
My background is mainly bioprocess engineering, modelling and process engineering. My PhD is multidisciplinary, so I’m also expected to deal with quite a lot of biology/microbiology. I can understand the general biology, but I’m definitely not a deep microbiologist.
My main supervisor is a microbiologist, and this is where a lot of the problems start.
He doesn’t really work in the specific area of my PhD, so when I have technical questions about the modelling or the actual system, I often don’t get much useful guidance. Sometimes I’m asked to calculate things that, after I actually look at the model, don’t really exist as a meaningful quantity in the way I’m being asked to calculate them.
Then I spend days trying to figure out what the hell I’m supposed to do.
I also have a collaborator who understands my actual work much better. I can sit down with him and properly discuss the model, results, assumptions etc. Honestly, he sometimes feels more like my actual PI because at least I can have a proper scientific discussion with him.
There have also been some pretty frustrating things during the PhD where I’ve found issues or inconsistencies in the work/model that apparently nobody noticed before. Some things were already being used or discussed as if they were correct, and then I find out later that there are problems with them.
That has caused setbacks because sometimes I’m not actually moving forward with my research. I’m going backwards trying to figure out whether something I was given or something already in the project is even scientifically correct.
And to be fair, I’m not saying I’m always right.
I get stuck too.
Sometimes I simply don’t know enough microbiology to solve a problem quickly. That’s one of the downsides of doing multidisciplinary research. I’m much more comfortable with process engineering and modelling, so when the problem suddenly becomes very deep biological/microbiological reasoning, I can get completely stuck.
But instead of getting help and moving on, I sometimes end up in these stupid loops with my supervisor where we keep arguing about the same thing without really resolving it.
My biggest frustration is that I don’t feel like I have someone above me who can properly say:
“Okay, this is the scientific question. This is what the model says. This is what the biology says. This is what the data says. Let’s decide what is actually correct and move on.”
Instead, I sometimes feel like I’m figuring out both the research AND how to supervise myself.
And now I’m getting worried because I don’t have unlimited time left. I still need to finish the PhD, publish, and move on with my life.
I’m not even sure what I’m asking here. Maybe I just want to know if other people have experienced this.
Has anyone else had a PhD where their supervisor was basically not an expert in the actual topic they were working on?
How did you deal with being stuck when your supervisor couldn’t really help?
And at what point do you stop thinking “I just need to become more independent” and start thinking “maybe the supervision is actually the problem”?
Because right now I honestly feel like I’m constantly trying to push the research forward while also trying to figure out what the research is supposed to be in the first place.

I’m honestly exhausted. I’ve now failed my practical driving test **4 times** in Leipzig and have spent **€6,000+** on lessons. I’ve driven for years in other countries, including Europe and Dubai, so I understand that German rules are different and I’ve worked hard to adapt.
The problem isn’t that I think I’m a perfect driver. I accept genuine mistakes and want to improve. But I’m increasingly concerned because some of the things recorded in the exams simply don’t match what happened from my perspective.
Today, for example, I was criticised for driving around **20 km/h in a 30 zone** and slowing at intersections. I did this deliberately because there were cars around me and I wanted enough space and visibility for *rechts vor links*. In a previous exam, I drove around **25–28 km/h in a similar 30 zone** and was told I was too fast/not leaving enough space. During normal lessons, my instructor has also told me that around 20–22 km/h can be appropriate in these situations.
Today the examiner also recorded that I **didn’t do a left shoulder check**. I am absolutely certain I did it — I even said “Schulterblick” out loud. The report still says it was missing.
There were also other points I genuinely dispute, including the claim that I drove **57 km/h in a 50 zone** and that I failed to recognise my priority. I consciously checked the priority situation and even said it out loud.
This isn’t the first time I’ve had this feeling. Since my second exam, I’ve increasingly felt that I may be getting treated more harshly. I don’t have proof that it’s racism, so I don’t want to make a definite accusation, but as a foreigner I am seriously starting to wonder whether my background/language is influencing how I’m being assessed.
My latest report actually rates my **communication and vehicle operation as good** and traffic observation as **sufficient**. Yet I still failed.
At this point I’m considering changing Fahrschule completely and getting a completely independent instructor to assess me.
**Has anyone in Leipzig experienced something similar? Would you change Fahrschule after four failed exams? Is it possible to formally challenge a DEKRA examiner or request a review?**
I’m genuinely open to being told I’m wrong if an independent instructor sees actual problems in my driving. I just want an honest, objective assessment because right now I don’t know whether I need more training—or whether something else is going on.

I’m honestly exhausted. I’ve now failed my practical driving test 4 times in Leipzig and have spent €6,000+ on lessons. I’ve driven for years in other countries, including Europe and Dubai, so I understand that German rules are different and I’ve worked hard to adapt.
The problem isn’t that I think I’m a perfect driver. I accept genuine mistakes and want to improve. But I’m increasingly concerned because some of the things recorded in the exams simply don’t match what happened from my perspective.
Today, for example, I was criticised for driving around 20 km/h in a 30 zone and slowing at intersections. I did this deliberately because there were cars around me and I wanted enough space and visibility for rechts vor links. In a previous exam, I drove around 25–28 km/h in a similar 30 zone and was told I was too fast/not leaving enough space. During normal lessons, my instructor has also told me that around 20–22 km/h can be appropriate in these situations.
Today the examiner also recorded that I didn’t do a left shoulder check. I am absolutely certain I did it — I even said “Schulterblick” out loud. The report still says it was missing.
There were also other points I genuinely dispute, including the claim that I drove 57 km/h in a 50 zone and that I failed to recognise my priority. I consciously checked the priority situation and even said it out loud.
This isn’t the first time I’ve had this feeling. Since my second exam, I’ve increasingly felt that I may be getting treated more harshly. I don’t have proof that it’s racism, so I don’t want to make a definite accusation, but as a foreigner I am seriously starting to wonder whether my background/language is influencing how I’m being assessed.
My latest report actually rates my communication and vehicle operation as good and traffic observation as sufficient. Yet I still failed.
At this point I’m considering changing Fahrschule completely and getting a completely independent instructor to assess me.
Has anyone in Leipzig experienced something similar? Would you change Fahrschule after four failed exams? Is it possible to formally challenge a DEKRA examiner or request a review?
I’m genuinely open to being told I’m wrong if an independent instructor sees actual problems in my driving. I just want an honest, objective assessment because right now I don’t know whether I need more training—or whether something else is going on.