Future restructuring of NASA and aerospace industry jobs

[nuaetius]

Given that so many things are changing in the Aerospace field, such as the start of the Orion program, ending of the Shuttle and the growth of the New Space companies it seems that in the next 5 years there will be major changes in the space workforce. I am a second year student getting ready to transfer out of Community college and go for my Bachelors. I know that I want to work in the Space field on the hardware side. The trouble I am running into is I believe that in the next few years there are going to be a lot of out of work engineers considering that the workforce that maintains/refurbishes the shuttles will be out of work. What fields are most likely to still be in demand after these people are reemployed? I want to work in the space industry but really would like to have an in demand skill set.

 

[thereiwas]

Robert Bussard said in his Google talk that it was hard to find people who understood the behavior of charged particles in electromagnetic fields.<br /><br />Electrical Engineers used to learn this stuff. (remember vacuum tubes?) When I was in school 35 years ago it wasn't mentioned once.

 

[owenander]

http://newspacerace.googlepages.com

 

[spacefire]

actually a lot of NASA engineers are on the verge of retiring with few stepping up to replace them (unless NASA revamps its stupid citizenship requirements) You might find little competition from ex-NASA employees if you enter the industry in a few years. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

"(unless NASA revamps its stupid citizenship requirements)"<br /><br />That is comment is just as s_____. It is not NASA's requirement. Since they are civil servants, you must be a citizen, US law. Why would anybody expect someone working for the US gov't not be a citizen

 

[spacefire]

lots of foreigners already work for NASA - hired by contractors.<br /><br />If they relaxed their policies and allow foreign citizens to work directly for the govt, they would get a lot of quality engineers and scientists and maybe get out of the mud ( red tape + excessive government control + brain drain) they're in currently.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[thereiwas]

Non-citizens can serve in the U.S. armed forces.

 

[jimfromnsf]

"If they relaxed their policies and allow foreign citizens to work directly for the govt, they would get a lot of quality engineers and scientists and maybe get out of the mud ( red tape + excessive government control + brain drain) they're in currently. <br /><br />How would foreign workers in the gov't fix this: red tape + excessive government control<br /><br />AND foreign workers would have ITAR issues <br /><br />

 

[spacefire]

simply restructuring the hiring process and decreasing government involvement enough to allow managers to hire foreigners would be a step towards less red tape <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <br /><br />Ultimately, most NASA assets and operations should be privatized or managed by universities so that government oversight becomes minimal.<br /><br />With private independednt contractors being the sole providers of launch services and orbital facilities (Blue Origin, SpaceX etc), NASA will have to charter flights just like everyone else. There will be no need for a huge NASA budget to contract large aerospace manufacturers to build/convert launch vehicles and spacecraft or provide services. Thus the budget will be judiciously used for space and atmospheric science and deep-space exploration.<br />LEO access, the big cost hurdle, will be handled by today's alt.space at competitive prices. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[spacefire]

<font color="yellow">AND foreign workers would have ITAR issues</font><br /><br />get them greencards. Under ITAR a permanent resident is a US person. The greencard process can take as little as a few months under corporate auspices. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

NASA is the government. It is a US government agenciy therefore it has to follow US gov't rules and regulations. There is no way to decrease government involvement because NASA is the gov't. What applies for NASA applies for the the DOT, DOE, IRS,HUD, etc.. The same hiring practices apply for these agencies as well as NASA. Therefore no foreigners. NASA doesn't need any anyways, the US can supply enough. Let the foreigners work for their own gov't or a contractor

 

[jimfromnsf]

"Ultimately, most NASA assets and operations should be privatized or managed by universities so that government oversight becomes minimal."<br /><br />Wrong. Most universities don't have the expertise to handle the size of most NASA projects. privatzed? What wind tunnels? why? Launch services? They are. <br /><br />NASA is the manager of the US gov't civilian space program. Without NASA, there is no US gov't civilian space program. Therefore NASA and gov't oversight are synomynous. The USAF provide gov't oversight of the military space program.<br /><br />"With private independednt contractors being the sole providers of launch services and orbital facilities (Blue Origin, SpaceX etc), NASA will have to charter flights just like everyone else."<br /><br />Duh. NASA does do that with unmanned launch sevices. But NASA gets the services from REAL launch sevices providers. Not some hokey website space companies. orbital facilities? there would be any usable for at least a decade.<br /><br />"There will be no need for a huge NASA budget to contract large aerospace manufacturers to build/convert launch vehicles and spacecraft or provide services.<br /><br />Huh? What about ULA and OSC for LV's. What about Boeing, LM, OSC, Ball, etc for planetary spacecraft.<br /><br />alt.space ? They haven't done anything worth contracting<br /><br />How about a little reality first.

 

[spacefire]

I can see several issues here:<br /><br />Other than the US military, I do not believe any other government agency is so dependent on contractors to function. That is why I believe NASA should stop being a government agency and become managed by universities and partly privatized, functioning under research grants from the government. It works for science in general, it should work for space exploration. We're not trying to 'police' outer space, we don't need a government agency to take us there. NASA as it is today is simply a byproduct of the cold war, just like NACA was a byproduct of the first world war.<br />Like any government agencies, they took on a life of their own and remained in existence long after the purposes for which they had been established had stopped being valid.<br />NASA is mired in inefficiency and politics and I am sure will not survive in its current for for much longer.<br /><br /><br /><br />Many articles I read warn of an impending shortage of aerospace engineers in the US, both at NASA and in general throughout the industry. Out of the US aerosapce engineering graduates, many forsake the aerospace industry for more attractive jobs in other fields or related industries, while foreign graduates of US schools are turned away by the draconian citizenship/greencard requirements for most aerospace jobs, even in the civil sector. Thus the output of aerospace engineers - graduated from American schools - is dwindling, resulting in the whole industry falling behind. A recent article in Aviation Week and Space Technology discusses this very issue.<br />It is time for Americans to realize that they are about to fall off the cutting edge in aviation and space and take measures to attract young scientists and engineers to the profession while there are still enough old-timers in the workforce around to train the youngsters.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[spacefire]

<font color="yellow">Wrong. Few universities don't have the expertise to handle the size of most NASA projects. </font><br /><br />that is because most NASA projects still rely on launchers designed to lob nuclear warheads and not for efficient cost effective orbital insertion.<br /><br /><br /><font color="yellow">Duh. NASA does do that with unmanned launch sevices. But NASA gets the services from REAL launch sevices providers. Not some hkey website space companies. orbital facilities? there would be any usable for at least a decade. </font><br /><br />the cost overruns incurred by the established providers far exceed the total bugets of these 'hokey ' alt.space companies. NASA itself is banking on them and has sponsored several projects for SpaceX<br /><br /><font color="yellow"><br />Huh? What about ULA and OSC for LV's. What about Boeing, LM, OSC, Ball, etc for planetary spacecraft. <br /><br />alt.space ? They haven't done anything worth contracting <br /><br />How about a little reality first. <br /></font><br /><br />the reality is that this system where the military-industrial complex has their claws firmly placed around matters of space science and peaceful exploration, sucking the budget dry with their outrageous costs- well this cold-war arrangement cannot continue for much longer.<br />it's just too inefficient and has no place in today's situation.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

"Other than the US military, I do not believe any other government agency is so dependent on contractors to function. That is why I believe NASA should stop being a government agency and become managed by universities and partly privatized, functioning under research grants from the government. It works for science in general, it should work for space exploration. "<br /><br />You don't know how things work. The unversities would have to use the same contractors. They don't have the expertise nor the manpower to do the work. Who would manage all the universitie's work?<br /><br />most science projects are small. <br /><br />the JPL model wouldn't work for every NASA center because you would have 10 different processes for doing the same thing. There would be more inefficencies. JPL is managed at NASA HQ. Also, JPL may be run by CalTech but it is a separate entity and really doesn't get much support from the school. Because it is not a gov't org, it pays higher salaries, which means it costs more. Back to an earlier comment, JPL contracts Boeing, OSC and Lockheed. <br /><br /> KSC is not a university type operation.

 

[jimfromnsf]

"that is because most NASA projects still rely on launchers designed to lob nuclear warheads and not for efficient cost effective orbital insertion. "<br /><br />You have no idea what you are talking about. Atlas V and Delta IV were specifically designed for GTO missions and delivery spacecraft into other orbits. Similarility between them and a ICBM is the same as a 767 and a F-117<br /><br />"NASA itself is banking on them and has sponsored several projects for SpaceX "<br /><br />Only one project, COTS, which it wouldn't be able to meet the milestone. It was a project doom to fail. <br /><br />" the military-industrial complex has their claws firmly placed around matters of space science and peaceful exploration,"<br /><br />Huh????? get real /*ad hominem deleted*/

 

[spacefire]

<font color="yellow">most science projects are small. </font><br /><br /><br />exactly! NASA needs to focus on that and leave vehicle development to corporations and the military. <br />The government can spur development by offering prizes as it did for aviation in the 20s.<br /><br />It's the only way our species can become multiplanet.<br />We don't need a government agency to take us to space.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[spacefire]

<font color="yellow">You have no idea what you are talking about. Atlas V and Delta IV were specifically designed for GTO missions and delivery spacecraft into other orbits. Similarility between them and a ICBM is the same as a 767 and a F-117 </font><br /><br /><br />that didn't seem to have done a whole lot of good on lowering the launch costs <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />http://www.astronautix.com/articles/costhing.htm <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[spacefire]

on a personal level, Jim, you seem to be getting overly emotional on this subject. I am sure I am not the first person you have heard make the arguments I made.<br /><br />What is your stake in this? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

"most science projects are small. "<br /><br />I wasn't referring to spacecraft but typical university research grants. small as in under $1M and don't even deal with hardware.

 

[jimfromnsf]

My stake is to enlighten the uninformed masses

 

[spacefire]

hmm then how come universities and colleges develop their own satellites, like the one that SpaceX was supposed to launch, from the Air Force Academy? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[spacefire]

<font color="yellow">My stake is to enlighten the uninformed masses </font><br /><br />Only if that to you is akin to justifying the status-quo <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>http://asteroid-invasion.blogspot.com</p><p>http://www.solvengineer.com/asteroid-invasion.html </p><p> </p> </div>

 

[jimfromnsf]

"hmm then how come universities and colleges develop their own satellites, like the one that SpaceX was supposed to launch, from the Air Force Academy?"<br /><br />A few hundred pound "cubesat" doesn't even approach HST, Cassini, Phoenix, Dawn, GOES, NOAA, MSL, Pathfinder, etc. <br /><br />Just as an ultralight is not a 777.

 

[jimfromnsf]

"Only if that to you is akin to justifying the status-quo"<br /><br />Newspace isn't going to be all what it is cracked up to be. After all it is rocket science.