Aerospace Engineering / Forensic Science

[blackadder]

Didn't want to post anywhere else due to utter irrelavance of question.

Any opinions regarding which degree would be the more fruitful/interesting/useful.

In a UK context (if you're going to talk about career prospects and all that).

I'm a bit more interested in the subject matter rather than the career applications.

Cheers

[LibertyOrDeath]

This is coming from an engineer (master's in engineering physics, specialized in electronic materials), so I might be biased, but I would definitely go with aerospace or another branch of engineering (preferably electrical, mechanical, or chemical).

Career opportunities will almost certainly be better in engineering. I know you said that's a secondary consideration, but you might think differently once you're looking for a job. I recommend taking this factor very seriously.

Regarding the intrinsic interest of the material...well, again, I'm biased...but a degree in aerospace engineering will probably teach you more about subjects that have greater applicability to more areas of science and technology. As an aerospace major, you'll learn plenty of advanced math such as partial differential equations, and that's the "language of nature." You'll apply that math (often using computer/numerical methods) to such subjects as fluid mechanics and solid mechanics. Again, these subjects have applicability beyond the scope of aerospace engineering; hence, your skill set will be more versatile. You could end up working as a mechanical engineer, for example, even if your degree is in aerospace engineering. They are closely related fields.

One big advantage to a degree in forensic science would be if you plan on living a life of crime! Obviously, the more you know about the latest methods in forensics, the more easily you can evade detection by such methods. But then there's a downside associated with that, too: Someone with a FS degree will probably have a day job working with or for pigs much of the time.

My $0.02, hope that helps a bit...

[Jacks Complete]

If you are in the UK, you will get a job with one of three companies if you go aerospace. You are kind of relying on the big one not going pop (Bae systems) which seems more likely by the day. If/when they go, there will be thousands of guys with a lot more time served than you looking for a job. Also, they have a terrible rep as an employer, and they only just got away with the latest bride scandal. You could get a job with Thales, Boeing, Northrop, or several others, and they might let you get out this shitty country.

Forensics? Sounds a lot more fun than a day/week/year fiddling with a fluid dynamics computation (if you are lucky) or doing spend & time tracking (more likely). Certainly I have been to good R&D labs for various things, and they are all fun. But, there is a lot more room for ending up as a gopher for years, typing computer printouts into other computers and dying slowly.

As a percentage, I'd say forensics has a far lower number of people doing it, and far fewer gophers without a hope, plus it's probably a lot more fun (if you have the stomach for it!)

The flipside is, become a merchant banker, earn $1m a year for three years, then retire & re-train as whatever the hell you feel like!

[megalomania]

It seems like everyone nowadays is becoming a forensics type, soon the job market will be flooded. Engineers are always in demand, even in peripheral occupations if worse comes to worse. CSI may make for a good TV show, but it is just Hollywood...

[nbk2000]

It's Engineers who build the machines that the forensics wonks use, not the wonks themselves.

[Bert]

When the local overpriced private tech school switched from advertising their computer courses to billboards by the highway lauding their criminal forensics program, I knew the wave had crested.

[Sausagemit]

Engineering will be 10x more rewarding as long as you don't end up as a desk jockey crunchin numbers all day. If you are good at what you do that most likely that will not happen. Very few smart engineers end up as desk jockeys no matter what there GPA at graduation is.

And statisticly speaking, the perfect 4.0 students make much better desk jockeys because nobody wants to hire the 4.0 students right out of college because usually they lack real world experience. It is that lack of real world experience and a lack of common sense that makes them the perfect number crunchers.

Right now, I'm about a year away from graduating with my BS in mech engineering. It's pretty rough but I couldn't be happier with my choice. With classes like mechatronics how can you go wrong :D

[blackadder]

Cheers for contributions!

The Aero engineering definitely seems to be the better option with regard to interest and importance and skills. And the career outlook is not that bad, having an Aero degree is certainly a powerful weapon in your arsenal for any job.

One issue that remains is the small range of work available within the UK Aerospace industry as mentioned by Jacks Complete - this makes it a highly competitive area to work in. Not that it will stop me from having a go.

It seems that back in the day, the UK Aerospace industry was far more diverse, with British companies all over the place (Hawker-siddeley, Avro, Blackburn, de Havilland, English-Electric, Vickers-Armstrongs) which over time have merged to British aerospace, and more recently British Aerospace has merged with Marconi (Defence brance of GEC in the US) to form BAE systems. It's a shame the industry seems to have gone downhill. There used to be some remarkable aircraft around back in the day. Seems that there aren't any more "pure" aircraft built by solely British companies anymore. The JSF program and Eurofighter are examples. I would have killed to be involved in the making of these old British aircraft:

===Check out the Vulcan:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Vulcan

One hell of an aircraft! The huge wings gave it such good lift the pilots compared flying this aircraft with flying a fighter jet - even had the same type of joystick control column.

===Also the TSR-2:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TSR-2
"one of the most advanced aircraft in the world, with supercruise ability, and similar thrust and Mach 2+ performance to the Rockwell B-1A and significantly higher performance than the current Boeing IDS B-1B." And this was in 1964 - simply stunning!

interesting stuff.

[megalomania]

You know, with the emergence of X-prize spacecraft from smaller aerospace firms I would expect such companies to grow like weeds over the next 20-30 years. We might be poised on a resurgence of space based technologies in the private sector the likes of which we have not seen since the 50s and 60s at NASA.

Maybe these small companies will not offer the higher salaries and entrenched job security of the big boys, but you could actually DO something to make a real difference at the small fries. Talk about real world experience... Once the big boys get on the ball and start buying all the little guys, you're in!