Excellent observation. The undergrad curriculum is a widely available commodity-- how well you master it depends on YOU. I did undergrad at GaTech and a Masters at MIT-- the prestige of the grad work dominated at job search time. Doing WELL in the undergrad will determine what sort of grad program you can get into.
As for the Aerospace question-- double major is a very good idea. My son did AE/EE at GaTech and finds the EE to be very much in demand in Aerospace circles.
Also, the comment about getting plugged into hands-on stuff is well taken. Co-op is good if you can get it. Engineering competitions like Design-Build-Fly or solar airplanes or whatever will get you some can-do credibility.
Finally, be prepared to take a bit of a hit on salary. There are a lot of true believers in the space travel camp, who follow the dream rather than the money.
Good luck.
The ejecta from "shooting down" a satellite will all assume orbits which pass thru the point of impact. If the event happens in sufficiently low orbit, the only debris with ANY chance of a surviving orbit is that ejected "horizontally" -- i.e. at right angles to the up-down axis. If they hit it at perigee, this subset of the debris will have an orbital lifetime similar to that of the original satellite. The worst case particles will be in a more eccentric orbit with the same perigee as before.
Anthony Watts' blog refers to the surfacestationshttp://www.surfacestations.org/ project. Which is now either slashdotted or has been taken down. My interest in pursuing the surfacestations link was because it links to a government site containing photos & location info on climate stations. This morning I heard a "right wing talk show host" say that ALL of the info on climate station sites has been taken down due to "privacy concerns."
The surfacestations project was systematically investigating possible skew to the all-important temperature data, and has thus put the climate researchers "on the spot" in at least a few cases.
I am struck by the consistent description of this event as the "worst school shooting in U.S. history." While this is certainly true, it artificially makes this into a tool for the anti-gun lobby. A more balanced presentation would include mention of the Bath School Disaster-- a 1927 school BOMBING in which the eventual toll was 45 dead. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster
The subtext seems to be that we've got it really bad today, and that good people don't own guns.
Slashdot Mirror
Excellent observation. The undergrad curriculum is a widely available commodity-- how well you master it depends on YOU. I did undergrad at GaTech and a Masters at MIT-- the prestige of the grad work dominated at job search time. Doing WELL in the undergrad will determine what sort of grad program you can get into. As for the Aerospace question-- double major is a very good idea. My son did AE/EE at GaTech and finds the EE to be very much in demand in Aerospace circles. Also, the comment about getting plugged into hands-on stuff is well taken. Co-op is good if you can get it. Engineering competitions like Design-Build-Fly or solar airplanes or whatever will get you some can-do credibility. Finally, be prepared to take a bit of a hit on salary. There are a lot of true believers in the space travel camp, who follow the dream rather than the money. Good luck.
The ejecta from "shooting down" a satellite will all assume orbits which pass thru the point of impact. If the event happens in sufficiently low orbit, the only debris with ANY chance of a surviving orbit is that ejected "horizontally" -- i.e. at right angles to the up-down axis. If they hit it at perigee, this subset of the debris will have an orbital lifetime similar to that of the original satellite. The worst case particles will be in a more eccentric orbit with the same perigee as before.
The surfacestations project was systematically investigating possible skew to the all-important temperature data, and has thus put the climate researchers "on the spot" in at least a few cases.
I am struck by the consistent description of this event as the "worst school shooting in U.S. history." While this is certainly true, it artificially makes this into a tool for the anti-gun lobby. A more balanced presentation would include mention of the Bath School Disaster-- a 1927 school BOMBING in which the eventual toll was 45 dead. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster The subtext seems to be that we've got it really bad today, and that good people don't own guns.