hindsight2020
Yeah Buddy
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Posts
- 235
bocefus said:
LMAO! I totally get your sentiment, I did 7 years of aerospace engineering, and in the process interacted with a lot of the Kool-Aid drinkers you refer to. There is a lot of punch-drinking in the aerospace industry. I too, know several Boeing, Lockheed (the devil), USA, Gulfstream-(SAV) employees, and they're all sipping that punch.
These companies have a vested interest in watching this thing launch, and although it is not in their interest for the mission to fail, the constant competition for Uncle Sam's $$$ makes these companies' money interest cloud their judgement and direct their influence negatively (read: they should cancel the Shuttle already).
The other sad thing I have witnessed is the level of wannabe-ism that exists in the aerospace industry. A lot of budding engineers with dreams of one day making it to the shuttle, or the F-22, F-35, whatever. It's real sad, and the majority of these folks do not enjoy their jobs, and as the rest of the world knew, the NASA "attitude determines your altitude" poster in your cubicle wasn't enough to make you an astronaut. There is a difference between the unwaivering perserverance that's necessary to be successful at something you're truly passionate about and trying to cover factors outside you control under the opiate that is "attitude determines your altitude" NASA posters (there's a reason they print these suckers fellas..)
Project closes, now you gotta find work somehow. Don't want to relocate? Now you're out of the aerospace industry, go code some random script for medical equipment displays. Hardly what they went into an unmarketable sector of technology to begin with. And I would know, I have two degrees in it LOL.
I remember doing the math a couple years ago and becoming discouraged by the economics of being a professional pilot, and looking into my degrees to "bite the bullet" so to speak (there was a time I thought about doing a phD on it, God save me). I couldn't stand it, having seen the dynamics of these work environments from countless colleagues, who at the time were the "lucky ones" who actually found work in such a small sector, become disgruntled and walk away from the industry in much the same manner as passenger carrier pilots walk away from their industry today.
It's not surprising at all to see Northrop-Grumman's logo pop up in my screen every morning as I log on to my computer lessons at UPT, I think of my friend who, last time I checked, worked for Northrop down in FL. How we had similar interests in technology, and how even though I may not be able to accrue a comfortable income for many years to come, I wake up every morning with the realization that what I see is what I get... and it's k!ckas$ , and how my friend constantly battles with hanging on to "the job" because it pays ok but he doesn't quite see the big picture in it like he thought he would as a freshman in college (you mean you don't get to strap to the F-22 for flight testing? The lying savages!! LOL). There are a lot of people in this industry like my friend, hoardes of quiet disgruntled laborers, and the exchange in this thread so reminded me of that struggle.
I'm for manned space flight as much as the next guy, but at the current "cost" it's just not making a good case. The fact of the matter is that the Shuttle is to NASA what The T-birds are to the USAF, a f$cking recrutiment tool; take away the Shuttle from NASA and these punch-drinkers in college would desert out of engineering and into business or finance or something with money attached to it, and universities would lose their enrollment, old crusty Apollo-era engineers-turns-tenured professors would lose their little bullet-proof gig, and Lockheed would lose the unending supply of eager high-tech cheap labor, which eventually will be fully outsourced to India anyways. No coincidence that this is an IDENTICAL dynamic to regional pilots and the Purdue/ERAU/UNDs of the world. Feeble? You bet, and that's the sad reality.
