runningncircles1

If you go to GA Tech, you could get an internship with Lockheed (which in Northwest of the city in Marietta/Cobb County... about a 30-60 min drive). I know they build stuff for the Air Force (and, with a base right across the street, what a savings on shipping :-P I sound like a salesman now), and it looks pretty good on a resume.

MattBowes

again, the question boils down to whether you want to be an employee or an employer. its one thing to be in a good aerospace program, its another to be in a good aerospace program in the context of an entrepreneurial, connected school. there will be so many opportunities to start space companies in the next two decades... why ride the wave when you can make the wave (and also billions of dollars)?

workingforblue

If you are confident you ONLY want to work for NASA, here is a Q&A from a NASA Webpage:
"What types of people does NASA hire?"

It is important to understand that NASA usually only hires two different types of people: contractors who have worked in the aerospace and science fields, or NASA Coops. This is why you should look for a college with a superior cooperative education program with a good tie to NASA.

Lancer78

I would say that out of those top engineering schools the one with the closest ties to NASA is probably Purdue University. Their biggest strength is in dynamics and control systems (if that is your thing) and many of Dr. Longuski's and Dr. Howell's graduate students end up working for JPL.

Purdue also boasts the highest number of aerospace engineering graduates that later become astronauts. The school definitely has a stronger "astronautics" flavor than just about any other aerospace engineering program with several of their classes having a "space" emphasis. MIT and UIUC may have strong NASA Connections as well although I am not as familiar with them.

Georgia Tech, although it has the #2 aerospace program in the nation, is mostly on the aero side. Purdue and UIUC may be ranked lower overall, but they are stronger in astronautics.

ireneat

Anyone know anything about the Aerospace degree in San Jose State U, CA ? What about Wichita State U

forte

San Jose State has a respectful eng program. Its in sil valley and with its location you can access one thing many students from top colleges dont typically get... the chance to intern for some of the top tech companies. I know that intel, ibm, hitachi, and many others offer intern programs... and these interns have good chances of lading jobs with these companies out of college which is difficult to do.

ireneat

Yes, I think I heard about their Computer degree. Anything more detail on their Undergraduate Aerospace or aeronautical program ? Anyone?

If you have the US News Ranking for Undergraduete Aerospace or Aeronautical ? Please post.

Does San Jose State U, WIchita State U, or Claifornia State U at Long Beach make the US News Ranking list?

I'm debating whether to go out state for a better U i.e. Purdue, EMbry-Riddle or stay close to home and save the room/board. Cost is an issue, but better education is also important.

Lancer78

The US News Rankings are on page 1 of this thread

ireneat

Lancer78, thanks for pointing out.

Read the ranking on this 1st page. I just thought there are more to the list.

brunelicsb0018

im currently attending a CCC and i wanna transfer to most likely a UC for aeroscape engineering. anyone know of the best areospace schools in califonria and anyone in aerospace engineering who transferred from a CCC or are in the same situation as i am??????

Alexandre

None of the UCs are really good in Aerospace Engineering. Stanford and Caltech are awesome though. Your best bet with the UCs is Cal, eventhough they do not really offer Aerospace Engineering to undergrads. What you can do is major in Mechanical Engineering at Cal and then go for a MS degree in Aeropsace Engineering.

AI008

Purdue definitely has one of the best aerospace engineering programs. UMich and GTech score higher than Purdue in aeronautics but in aerospace only MIT is better than Purdue. The faculty members of Purdue's Aeronautical and Aerospace Engr (AAE) program are simply amazing. Hard working, dedicated, intelligent and most importantly.. visionaries.. that's how I describe Purdue's AAE department. In my opinion, the main reason why MIT does better than Purdue in aerospace is because they have better funding. But if you want some really quality education... come to Purdue!!

M4gici4n

Why are schools without PhD's "generally worse schools"? I want to go to either Embry-riddle or U of Michigan, but its gonna be a really tough decision. Both of them are ranked really high. Oh, and I also applied to Purdue. So yeah, between those 3 schools, its gonna be a tough decision.

Are ERAU and UM comparable? I like the fact that ER has a small pop'n and is focused on AE quite a lot. But I've heard great things about UM also...Lots of research, and its ranked pretty high, right up there with MIT and caltech.
And Purdue, I heard its AE program was great (including the other Engineering majors) but that the rest of the school was only mediocre. Is that just a rumor or what? thx.

rocketDA

cambridge, mass was supposed to be the headquarters for nasa in the 50's... but instead, they went to texas 8-O

"i am interested in studying aerospace engineering, but i dont which college has good prog.
my goal is work in NASA, so i am tryin to find a college which has connection with NASA."

Why work with NASA? I mean, do you wish to reform NASA? It's very bureaucratic now-a-days. If you want to work for NASA to make some change, good. It needs it.

Let's see, I've worked for NASA (at JPL, badge#xxx686) on and off since 2003 and now I am a technical consultant for Div 3533 and HVI, under H.L. and M.A., respectively. I may have a bit of experience with what you have spoke about... being in NASA and all.

Go with the "back-door" approach to getting a job. Intern for a year and keep in touch with your boss and such. If technical people request you be hired, the HR people will listen to them.

As for NASA-connected schools, I don't see the point. It would be better to go to a school where you learn a lot and then stun NASA with your brilliance than just try to go the normal recruiting method... I mean, just because there is a link between some schools and NASA does not mean that they are super-exceptional schools. I think part of NASA's demise over the last few decades has been its overzealous recruiting to specific schools (instead of being more broad, allowing for more diverse pools). If you do this, you are just adding to the problem... You'll get in to NASA, but you may not have received the best education.

"Why are schools without PhD's "generally worse schools"? I want to go to either Embry-riddle or U of Michigan, but its gonna be a really tough decision. Both of them are ranked really high. Oh, and I also applied to Purdue. So yeah, between those 3 schools, its gonna be a tough decision."

What about places like Harvey Mudd, Olin, Swarthmore, Reed, Pomona, Amherst, Grinnell? These are some of the top schools in the country and they don't have PhD programs. If you're talking about schools that have their name in technology, that narrows the list to Harvey Mudd and Olin, which are definitely comparable to schools like MIT, Caltech, and Stanford. Just because there are not movies about them doesn't mean that they are second-rate. In fact, the self-selecting applicant pool is very nice in ensuring that only those who are serious about attending will apply.

Let's talk about education. At HMC, for instance, there are no TA's and professors go out of their way to make themselves accessible to students. The technical and academic rigor is ridiculous, and although it has recently been shown that the mean gpa is in the 3.2 range, the gpas don't get boosted to junior/senior year (roughly 2.7 up to that point). Imagine a program where EVERYONE (including biology majors) have to be familiar (as core requirements) with QED, SR, E&M (and lab), Classical Mech (and lab), 2 terms Chem (and lab), Comp Sci, DiffEqs, MultiV, LinAl, ProbStat, Bio, Signals and Systems. (plus 12 hum/ss courses) Add two more terms of Signals and Systems, Exp Eng, Chem Eng, Continuum Mech, Elect Eng, Digital El Eng, 5+ Eng electives, Clinic and Research ontop of that and you have a monster engineering degree (and probably have learned a lot!).
http://www.eng.hmc.edu/EngWebsite/De...ngHandbook.pdf

At a school where it is all about the undergrads (all 720 of them), you'll receive much more attention and quite possibly a better education.

Olin may be even better at providing attention to their students. I'm haven't heard very much about how their program is (there are only 60 or so alums?), but I'd imagine that they totally kick butt over there.

I think a lot of people who understand the importance of personal attention and opportunities consciously go to schools where there are no grad students. If there were grad students at my school I definitely would not have the types of opportunites I have (not to mention I wouldn't be there).

Mr Payne

And the obligatory HMC exposition has been posted.