Aero Courses at University

[Spitfire Retreat]

Having just come across this site I am aware of a great deal of ill feeling from U/Gs reading for aero degrees.
I wish that the word reading was indeed correct because an awful lot of students do their very best to avoid it.
Now - if you want changes in the courses then don't just whine about it - tell us what changes you want. Aero is hard - of course it is - when an aircraft flies one hopes that the designers and technical staff knew a thing or two. There will be a lot of metal falling from the sky if not! Yes I work in an academic world - and yes I have had 15 years in the industry, so I am very aware of what is needed. I am just sorry that the learning process has become so passive. Aero is an active subject which requires commitment - if this is too difficult then by all means study theatre studies or coffee pot ergonomics or underwater knitting. If your social science friends are loafing around- that is probably because that is the most difficult part of their course.
So - I throw down a challenge - what do you want, and I will put our side of the story - and then maybe we can find the middle ground.

[splonguk]

What do we want? I am an u/g at Imperial, and what disruntles me the most is that there is not a single aspect of the course (except management) that is not entirely maths based! I knew before I came here that the course had a large maths content, but I was never made aware that it is all maths! I only did single maths a-level, and I feel that you should really be asking for double maths.

Secondly, the lecturers teach third order homogeneous equations in the same amount of time as they spend on resolving forces! This is ludicrus (spelling??)

Thirdly, don't penalise people for wanting to spend a year in europe! I plan to go to France in my third year, and yes understand that I need to have lots of regular french classes to get up to an exceptable standard. Year abroad is recognised by the RAeS, but those not doing a language must do management. I have 3hours of French a week plus at least 1 piece of 'homework' a week for 3 terms, and 3 exams over the year. Management people have 1 hour a week, plus 1 essay, and 1 exam in the first term. Surprisingly, the amount assigned to management is the same as french yet I have a great deal more work!

Also, when I return from France in my third year, I must do some of the modules that are taught at Imperial in the third year, but not taught in France! Why should I have to do this extra work on top of all my fourth year modules. Also, why do I need at least one year of management to be recognised by the RAeS - again, I will have to do this management when I return from France!!

Next, why are there no hands on, real life, practical examples. I know that the 1st years probably don't know enough for an industry visit, but surely a trip to BA at LHR or something similar - a day out of lecture theatres and in real life will be hugely advantageous.

We are led to believe (from what we see at Imperial) that Aero Eng is all about maths, and sitting at a desk using CAE. This does not reflect the truth!!

This year, over 50% of the people in my year have contemplated quitting! We have exams in a week, and very few have the motivation to revise - because it is all maths!

Over the year, we have lost around 10 students because they have quit! We only have 66 in the year in the first place.

Aero Eng has nothing to do with aircraft in day to day life. I am sure it is great if you want to be Airbus' specialist in aerodynamics of engine intakes etc. What about all those who joined the course believing that it was about aircraft, how they work, why they work etc. We are led to believe, from the course prospectuses that this is what Aero Eng is about! We are mis-lead!

Why doesn't someone somewhere realise that students do this course to learn about aircraft! Why doesn't someone create a course which encorporates aerodynamics, thermo, mechanics, aircraft performance, aircraft maintenance, air transport management - all the things that would be useful to someone who wants to work with aircraft (and have detailed knowledge about them), but doesn't want to design them from scratch!

Airline don't want design engineers, they want someone who doesn't mind getting his hands dirty, and someone who knows where to find the ******* on a B747-400.

[This message has been edited by splonguk (edited 25 May 2001).]

[Spitfire Retreat]

I am worried that hards on, real life examples might get me arrested!

[splonguk]

Sorry - all spelling mistakes are corrected - I think.

Just seen that you are from Southampton Uni. What do you aim to do with the list of complaint/suggested improvements that people make here?

Will you go to the RAeS? Will you go to other universities?

[This message has been edited by splonguk (edited 25 May 2001).]

[Pianoman]

As I pointed out in another topic already, we at Delft University of Technology (Delft Aerospace) also suffered from a decreasing interest in the study of Aerospace Engineering a few years ago. Besides that the drop-out rate was way too high.

So both the appeal of the study had to be changed as had the curriculum. Not that it had too become easier, but more that the emphasis of the study had to shift more from being a pure technical, formulae business to a more industry related study. In other words:what does the industry expect of the graduated students?

Of course, the industry wants people with a sound technical background, but there's an increasing demand for people that have also learned to work together, that possess leadership and management skills and that know how to run a project.

So in Delft we carefully looked at the possibilities to incorporate these 'management' aspects in the study. It turned out that there were enormous opportunities to achieve this.

Nowadays the study in Delft is for a large part what is called 'project-based education '. During their study in aerospace engineering the students learn to put their theoretical knowlegde from the lectures into practice, thereby developing their management skills. The students work in small project-groups (8 to 10 persons) on a certain problem for some weeks and have to achieve some goals within this time. They are supported by the experts at our faculty, who are obliged to spend a number of hours per month on this support function. Also the aerospace industry is involved in these projects on a voluntary basis. They clearly see the advantage of getting better prepared students entering their companies after the study is finished and are thus willing to participate in their training by providing interesting cases that the students have to work on.

This concept really seems to work, because the motivation of the students is highly increased by giving them the responsibility to bring these projects to a good ending. Further, for them it is also fun, to have your own office, computers and running your 'own business' while working together with your fellow students.

The number of freshmen has increased dramatically over the past few years and is now reasonably stable. Unfortunately, I had already graduated when they switched to this project-based education, but as I have a job at the university now and then (to fill up the gaps during my flying training) I can clearly see the advantages over the old method of reading only books that used to be the practice in my time.

Maybe this helps you to figure out new ways to improve student involvement in their study and giving you as a lecturer more job-satisfaction. You can check our website on www.delftaerospace.com (http://www.delftaerospace.com) for more information.

[BravoEcho]

You are right Pianoman!!!
Delft Aerospace rules!!!

BE

ps: We vlogen met een zucht....

[Evo7]

I didn't do Aero. Eng. at university, but I was in a similar situation. My BSc was in Astronomy, yet I never touched a telescope. My degree was all .... Maths. Sound familiar?

Now, strange as it may seem, that's been a blessing. I'm damn glad that I have that background now I am working in Astronomy at a professional level. At the time it was a pain in the backside, but there are subjects where you have to learn the basics. Sounds like Aeronautical Engineering is another one.

The mistake, it seems, is that the students come for the love of the subject (I did) while Universities are training people to have the skills they need to make a living working in the field. The two aren't necessarily the same thing.

[Lucifer]

Lesson? Check the degree before you embark upon it. All eng/physics/chemistry/economics etc has HARD maths in it. That's why it's a degree, requires loads of work and is a step up from A-Level.

[Stan Evil]

Okay, so I did my aero degree 30 years ago but I suspect that not much has changed. Some universities (Bristol, Imperial, Oxbridge) offered an aeros degree that was really a fluid mechanics degree with nothing but hard sums. Others (Soton, City and Loughborough) were much more practical (still lots of hard sums tho') with third year options on aerospace design and management etc. You've got to go into it with your eyes open - that's what prospectuses (prospecti?), open days and interviews are for. Spitfire Retreat is right, if you want to spend 3 years navel-gazing then do soc-sci or some other pansy subject, if you want a challenging but rewarding 3 years with the prospect of well paid (?) and interesting employment at the end then knuckle-down and do a proper engineering degree.

[Spitfire Retreat]

Thanks for the replies - I hope they keep coming. I have been asked to look at our degree syllabus and I hope to come up with suggestions as to how we can do better.
Your replies answer a lot of questions, for which I am very grateful.

I am just disappearing down the exam marking plughole so will not be coming up for air for a little while. I am still interested in any further suggestions (anatomically possible please).

[NewBloke]

I too studied for an Aero/Astro degree (I won't say where), and I'm afraid I do have to agree with some of the posts regarding the maths content of the course. I understand that this is obviously an important part of engineering, but I felt that people were thrown into the deep end of some serious mathematics, without first gaining the basic underlying principles of what the maths was trying to explain. I think if things were initially approached a little more qualatitively (Hope that's spelt right !), interest levels would be maintained. It can be soul destroying to spend an hour in a lecture theatre, scribbling down so many equations and derivations that you do not have time to actually listen to what the lecturer is saying, only to have to go home and decipher what it means without any basic understanding. Many of my colleagues also thought this. An example would be the ability of passing exams purely by learning the derivation of an immense equation without really understanding its purpose. To quote an old lecturer of mine (Talking about some heavy maths I hasten to add !), it was a case of "...turning the handle of the sausage machine...". However, I do not wish to portray my course as all bad. Some lecturers were particularly effective at teaching their subject, and I can honestly say I did not meet one who did not have the time to help outside of lectures. We also got a good trip to visit BA Engineering at Heathrow with a couple of Sim rides chipped in. There was also a week long course with daily trips dutch-rolling/stalling in a Jetstream (I believe organised by Cranfield...) which you obviously cannot moan about. I wish it was a four year course though ! Funny thing is, I bloody well dropped out of a Maths degree to do Aero..!

[Genghis the Engineer]

At risk of diverting Spitfire's thread, I seem to recognise your course and lecturer Newbloke, which year did you graduate?

G

[NewBloke]

Hi Genghis,

You're not gonna discover (work out) my identity and kill me are you !!!? Hopefully you're nothing to do with my old Uni (although I hope my opinion came across as honest and not too offensive). I graduated in '97.... There's a few people on here I believe I know, many from Uni......

[Genghis the Engineer]

No need to panic, I was getting chartered roundabout your second year.

G