Engineers
Not one mention of Chem E. ?????
Once a sub-branch of ME started at MIT about 100 years ago, lots of labs, flow calculations, hands-on....what's not to like? Except for the crushing workload.
Just a suggestion.
Bret
From going through the school and classes in ME this post can not be any more TRUE!
Tough through the hole thing. It is one of the HARDEST majors in college, but the payoff and knowledge you leave with is second to none. Fluids and statics are a bitch. Diff Eq is not a breeze either (To some it is) but just keep your learning cap on for sure!
And i couldnt agree more on the SAE, i am starting next semester because i have applied for internships with a lot of major automotive companies and on every application it says that it is a plus.
You're above statement is not wrong however it's flawed. I am approved for and studying for my PE exam now; I graduated in 2002. An MET degree from an accredited university. (I touched on this before in this thread, page 3 bottom) will allow you the same benefits as a four year BS Mechanical Engineering degree. I have friends that graduated BSME from Penn State, and we had similar classes. They had less "hands on labs" where we tested the theories. I never was one for theory work, as I prefer to do test and apply the theorys with my own hands, not on a piece of paper so Mechanical Engineering Technology fit me perfectly. As far as Penn State's programs, the difference between the two is negligible.
Oh, and up here in Pennsylvania the major doesn't mean ****, until you get those two letters at the end of your name. You are not considered to be an engineer until you pass the PE exam.
Tony
edit - also, I realized, it seems like alot of the points being made in this thread are because people like to build custom stuff. Custom items are typically one off, using an informal design process, with a minimal cost oversight. This is really not what engineers do. If this is what people like, then become a fabricator, because that's what fabricators do. For example, engineers don't design a turbo system to just build one or two for a total of $6000 each. They design with the intent of building say 10k units, or some other large number, with a cost goal of say $3000 each. My point is, it's not as hands on as one may want, and definately not as exciting.
Also, most non-construction engineering jobs (and even that's being threatened now by India) I'm seeing are now going to China and India. Basically, choose some profession where you can support yourself in a non engineering role, or be prepared to start your own services based business.
Last edited by usdmholden; Feb 14, 2007 at 02:19 PM. Reason: because I had a revelation
edit - also, I realized, it seems like alot of the points being made in this thread are because people like to build custom stuff. Custom items are typically one off, using an informal design process, with a minimal cost oversight. This is really not what engineers do. If this is what people like, then become a fabricator, because that's what fabricators do. For example, engineers don't design a turbo system to just build one or two for a total of $6000 each. They design with the intent of building say 10k units, or some other large number, with a cost goal of say $3000 each. My point is, it's not as hands on as one may want, and definately not as exciting.
Also, most non-construction engineering jobs (and even that's being threatened now by India) I'm seeing are now going to China and India. Basically, choose some profession where you can support yourself in a non engineering role, or be prepared to start your own services based business.
I am of the opinion that electronics are used to control the mechanical elements of an engine or most other 'hardware', but they don't actually pump the air or convert it to torque and rpm. Won't we still need folks to design, develop and test the mundane hard parts that do the work? Therei s only so much 'controlling' you can do to 'hotrod' a given engine. The person who improves the hardware's ability to pump air, etc. is going to have the more powerful engine assuming he gets the electron person to optimize the controls.

In order to effectively convince the hardware to pump more air faster, you probably need a good understanding of things physical. That's where the ME comes in. OK, so I'm a very prejudiced ME. 40 years ago, at the dawn of the computer age when an IMB 360 would fill a small trailer, the EEs said it was all over for us MEs. Granted there is a higher % of EEs, CEs, etcEs today, but Ma Nature still pumps air by the same ol' rules. Fortunately engines, and the parts in them still play by her rules.
As my son said early on in theis thread, "...people either have an mechanical understanding or they don't, you almost can't teach people to 'get it'." Unfortunately I have known some degreed MEs who just 'don't get it'. IMO, those folks picked the wrong major.
One need not start just a services oriented business to be sucessful. How about hundreds of "one offs" that are similar but different? Even if it's PCM software it's a product, not a service.
My $.02.
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
And a note for ME's, EE's, etc: if you're a computer geek, learn C and/or C++ and try to pick up a couple of Computer Science classes. Writing code can be great fallback if you don't find something you like in your engineering. About half of the software developers I work with weren't CS majors.
I'm saying that the electronics frontier is the future of "hot rodding" only because most of the new advances in technology seem to be on the EE side, and also, a vehicle's electrical functionality is far less exploited than the vehicle's mechanical functionality. And also I'm being very liberal with the definition of "hot rodding" I don't think it's all over for the MEs, or even that the MEs are in decline, I just think there's more room to grow on the electrical side. Think about all features in cars now, most have electrical controls. For example. What do the "black boxes" really do, and if they are data loggers (most people seem to think they are), why can't we reflash them, integrate them to aftermarket hardware, and pull down the logged data for our own use over a USB connection to say analyze a pass at the drag strip? Given that CAN bus is mostly standardized, why hasn't someone made custom hardware to putput instant CAN bus data which can be logged via laptop. Also, why even use the USB connection I mentioned above, why not transmit CAN bus via wireless Bluetooth or 802 protocol from a simple plug in transciever plugged into Flash scan plug under the dash? Why don't we have electronic drag launch control which takes gyro input and sensor input and continuously modifies the front and rear shock damping via electronics. Why don't we have add on zone climate control controlled by aftermarket hardware which uses existing CAN bus networking to operate HVAC valving which already exists from the OEM? These are just examples of things that could be done today, given technology we have today, but are not being done at all, because people who understand how to do it are not doing it. "Hot rodding" in it's most liberal definition has not yet passed power generation and handling. There will always be a need for companies than can make a car perform mechanically, but that is being done now and people are good at it now, and given the current lack of electronics support, and given the fact that future will generate even more electronics requirements, the largest portion of industry growth will have to be on the electronics side. This is my opinion of course.
And I understand the statement your son made. I graduated from college with a guy who couldn't figure out how to use an oil drain pan (the complicated kind that requires you to move the plastic funnel from the recessed carrier, and thread it into position over the hole) but somehow he got a job at Pratt & Whitney designing turbine engine blades (???).
EE is a gamble in the grander scheme (personal opinion, what I feel long term wise)
That field's technology evolves at a mindblowing pace. It won't be a specialization of a particular field, but a general encompassment of the underlying principals that will serve you better in this one. However, you would be in great demand (it's really weird, but there is a lack of engineering talent supply), academic climate in the U.S. isn't that hot, so you'd have an advantage.
I view ME as a more "stable" approach. The knowledge gained in this realm literally "physically" underpins EE. So there will be always be a demand for this. There is always a need for new better materials to boot. Go this route if you love physically tinkering with stuff.
Either way, stay in an engineering degree! Don't cop out to poli sci.
threadjack:
Hey okls1, i take it your a golden hurricane ?(what year? you might know a couple of my engr. buddies up there) You go to Hallett out of curio?
You're above statement is not wrong however it's flawed. I am approved for and studying for my PE exam now; I graduated in 2002. An MET degree from an accredited university. (I touched on this before in this thread, page 3 bottom) will allow you the same benefits as a four year BS Mechanical Engineering degree. I have friends that graduated BSME from Penn State, and we had similar classes. They had less "hands on labs" where we tested the theories. I never was one for theory work, as I prefer to do test and apply the theorys with my own hands, not on a piece of paper so Mechanical Engineering Technology fit me perfectly. As far as Penn State's programs, the difference between the two is negligible.
Oh, and up here in Pennsylvania the major doesn't mean ****, until you get those two letters at the end of your name. You are not considered to be an engineer until you pass the PE exam.
Tony
Some programs are very academic. Meaning, they focus a lot on the theory. Some programs do a good job in teaching you how to work in the real world. Taking factors such as complexity, cost, reliability, part availability. We are seeing that now with some people we hire. They do not know how to do anything outside of what is taught in a book.
Degrees and grades get you a job. How you perform and continual learning dictates your success the rest of your career. How you communicate, manage projects, work in teams in often time stressful situations is important. How do you react when you are in a situation and have no idea how to start? Being successful in that task is why you have the title of engineer.
PE doesn't mean squat in this industry. Some people get it for pride. But I have to be honest that most managers don't seek that. They want someone who can come in and do the job and make them look good.
You're above statement is not wrong however it's flawed. I am approved for and studying for my PE exam now; I graduated in 2002. An MET degree from an accredited university. (I touched on this before in this thread, page 3 bottom) will allow you the same benefits as a four year BS Mechanical Engineering degree. I have friends that graduated BSME from Penn State, and we had similar classes. They had less "hands on labs" where we tested the theories. I never was one for theory work, as I prefer to do test and apply the theorys with my own hands, not on a piece of paper so Mechanical Engineering Technology fit me perfectly. As far as Penn State's programs, the difference between the two is negligible.
Oh, and up here in Pennsylvania the major doesn't mean ****, until you get those two letters at the end of your name. You are not considered to be an engineer until you pass the PE exam.
Tony
ME is a degree that has so many choices of what you can do with it. Forget about salaries. After 10+ years of experience, you can command just about any salary that you want. Just pick a number and convince your employer that your worth it and thats all there is to it..







