Engineering needs no introduction in India, but perhaps Aeronautical Engineering does. It most certainly deserves a disambiguation. So here's to all those who get all excited when we answer their question regarding our qualification - Oh, and by the way, we're extremely obliged to you, you are the only people who seem to show us any respect - swap with us for a month and you'll sympathize with us for the rest of your lives. In short, we picked this field hoping it would turn tables, but all that turned were heads.
We Aeronautical Engineers are like upper caste folk. In fact we are like brahmins. Apparently the uppermost caste, and the most oppressed lot, we flaunt our "cool" titles, the only remainder of the ancestral grandeur we claim to have once had, which mock at our current plight and stand as one of the best examples of paradox in Indian society. Only, we had no past where any of our ancestors can be accused of tormenting the "lower" discipline folk. We face challenges nearly every week, when we are confronted with questions about electronic devices in the cockpit, as to whether we work at the airport or are pilots, demands as to why crashed aeroplanes haven't been found yet, and the occasional wannabe-scientifically-minded question, so ambiguous and pathetically crazy that we wonder if the person asking the question is even sure of what he/she wants to ask. To to top it all, we are often accused of not being good engineers because we aren't able to tell the difference between an A350 and a Boeing 787, or simply because we tend to pick up a calculator to perform arithmetic calculations ("You are an engineer and you want a calculator to do this simple calculation?")
Right, you are now clear that we need not know answers to any of the above questions. So what do we know, you ask? Well, we have willingly or forcibly learnt Aircraft Structures (more commonly known among the Aero fraternity as just Structures), Aerodynamics, Propulsion and Flight Mechanics, seemingly shallow, yet reaching great depths occasionally, consciously or otherwise.
We're possibly the best B.Techs in structural mechanics, certainly overtaking mechanical engineers, perhaps on par with our civil counterparts, only that we are good at elasticity, vibration, finite element methods and experimental stress analysis instead of soil mechanics and the like. Our knowledge of fluid mechanics is certainly unmatched by any other graduates.
Aircraft propulsion and flight mechanics, being specific to this field, are other areas of expertise.
And, needless to say, our syllabus-deciders have managed to squeeze in some C Programming, four semesters of "engineering" mathematics which most probably covers the syllabus of B.Sc Mathematics, thermodynamics, engineering mechanics and even theory of machines. In other words, we are as equipped as any other engineering graduate, to work in non core, and sufficiently qualified to work on what mechanical engineers can do. Oh, and let me do justice to our weak side as well. We're pathetic at engineering drawing. And automotive engines. A couple of years of focusing on the Brayton cycle has cost us the memory of other automotive engine cycles, and that's about the size of it, but hey! We are people trained to optimize structural stress and aerodynamic forces - one of the most challenging aspects of engine design. How long will it take us to simply recollect some topics that we've merely lost touch with? Believe me, we've done that towards the end of each and every semester of our course, and so we've got plenty of practice.
I must admit that if it's research is what you want to do, aerospace is the field for you. Yes, we have, unfortunately been born in an era where some beautiful topics have been researched on so much that, all that can be published on them are textbooks, but there is no dearth of research topics in engineering, particularly in aerospace. And we have plenty of students taking up Master's and PhD programmes every year - and they fall under one of three broad categories, whatever their specific intentions may be: those who are, or believe they are tailor made for research, those who either didn't get jobs or seek a better job opportunity than those available to them, and those who wish to change their field of study.
That said, let's bring our discussion to the majority of the population: graduates who need to get employed.
So now comes the big question: Why don't engineering companies want us? Why don't government bodies like ISRO and DRDO want us? It might seem senseless to ask this after the previous questions,but just to complete the questionnaire: why don't PSU's like ONGC and BARC want us? I am specifically targeting these organizations, because they gladly take engineering graduates from the three golden engineering disciplines: Mechanical, Electronics and the evergreen Computer Science - grads who can simply get anything - oh did I say "evergreen" Computer Science? Yes, I did - And I meant it. No recession ever deprives these people of options. Even if it does, they have a fat bank balance, thanks to the pay offered by their dream jobs, when people from other engineering disciplines only dream of getting jobs.
I'm going to have to disappoint the reader - if they aren't already disappointed, that is - for I have no answer to the set of questions I have raised above. And nor do I believe my target organizations do. It might simply be their way of cutting down on number of job applicants, which sounds perfectly justifiable from MNCs' point of view but cruelly unjust from the point of view of government organizations. Or they may be simply unaware of our capabilities, but for how long?Aeronautical Engineering has existed in India since Madras Institute of Technology, Chennai started offering it in 1949. Anything further that I may say here will be arguably brushed aside as baseless speculation, and so I'll stop here.
It will certainly take immense financial and infrastructural effort to create tailor made opportunities for aeronautical engineers to use their full potential, not to mention the planning required and the huge risks involved, but for the time being, they can be accommodated in the roles already available. The skills I have mentioned above more than satisfy the requirement of mechanical engineering and IT roles.
We're not desperate people, we're people who deserve opportunity and haven't been given even a fraction of it.
So dear companies, please think twice before you post your "Eligibility to apply" criteria.
To colleges, I say this: Don't offer a course if you can't ensure that at least a handful of students can get placed in companies.
And, most of all, to aspiring students: Look before you leap. Know very clearly what you are walking into, and decide right. Talks of following your passion are the trend of the day. Yes, it sounds great, but if you are not practical, your heart might lead you into a ditch. And this holds good not just for India, it's a life lesson.
The reader may put me down as a self-sympathizing cynic, and I don't seek to argue, but I do wish to clarify that I speak here, not as an individual, but as a representative of every aeronautical or aerospace graduate in this country.
To companies, I ask, "Why not aerospace?" and to students, "Why aerospace?"
