Advantages of a PhD in Aerospace Engineering over just a B.S./M.S.?

[SwimBikeRun4342]

Hi Everyone:

I am an aerospace engineering student at a top engineering university, getting a Masters degree. I was offered to stick around for a PhD, since my funding was extended. However, I'm wondering if there is an practical benefits in spending an extra 3-4 years getting a PhD, as opposed to spending 3-4 years as a practicing engineer in industry (and making much more money).

I typically hear that there are very little benefits in getting a PhD, when compared to getting Masters degree and working immediately. I have even heard that getting a PhD can make you less marketable and you're considered to be over-specialized.

Here are some of the questions I have:
1) Does a PhD in Aerospace Engineering open up doors to high level management positions?

2) What type of jobs are available to doctorate olders that aren't available to the rest?

3) How to salaries of doctorate holders (in aerospace and similar industries) compare to others?

4) Do engineers with a PhD have more or less job security than others?

5) I feel like spending 3-4 years in academia publishing (and coding and working with software) is good, but LESS effective then 3-4 years actually working as a practicing engineer. Is the 3-4 years spent on a PhD wasted time?


A lot of people on this forum have great careers and experience, and your input would be appreciated.

Thanks!

 

[IRstuff]

1) Does a PhD in Aerospace Engineering open up doors to high level management positions?

I don't think sol in fact, I think it's the exact opposite. What's the point of getting an advanced degree if you're going to do management?

2) What type of jobs are available to doctorate olders that aren't available to the rest?

Generally, that would be research and academic positions

4) Do engineers with a PhD have more or less job security than others?

Depends. If the R&D positions get whacked, the PhDs are more likely to get whacked, compared to if regular jobs are whacked. Typically, in downturns, research gets whacked harder than other jobs, since they are the least likely to produce immediate revenue.

5) I feel like spending 3-4 years in academia publishing (and coding and working with software) is good, but LESS effective then 3-4 years actually working as a practicing engineer. Is the 3-4 years spent on a PhD wasted time?

Depends on what you what to do. If you are looking for a research position, then a PhD may be necessary condition.


TTFN
faq731-376

Need help writing a question or understanding a reply? forum1529

 

[Compositepro]

The purpose of a PhD is to develop university researchers and professors. Some positions in industry require a PhD because corporations want it for the prestige it gives to them. I believe that the value of a PhD in industry is deminisining. But, if you want to be in R&D in most large corporations you must have a PhD. I did it as a BSc but that is not common.

 

[rotw]

Possible suggestion:
Get a PhD in no more than 3 years learn as much as you can if doable and than hide it completely from your resume whereas possible of course (find some excuse like a long break after graduation or another story - at least try to not trigger a question from recruiter). Show only the master to recruiters.

Then join industry in a engineer position but do not talk about your PhD. Build up between 5-8 years experience as Engineer.
At that point when you apply for future jobs, you apply as an Engineer and then show your PhD and write in bold. During interview the interviewer will have no excuse to focus specifically on your PhD and try to block you as at that point it is fair to say you are recognized to be have a solid Engineering background and references.

 

[FeX32]

I understand how you feel. However, do not be discouraged. There is always a way if you have the will.
It is true that when applying for positions that do not require the PhD in industry (which is the majority of them), the employers may ask you "so, why the PhD? will you jump ship once something better comes along?".

However, if you really want to work in the industry and you can show the transferable skills into the job (there are many), you can promote your PhD as some extra skills and experience compared to the next guy.
After all, soon everyone will have a masters and you need a way to differentiate yourself.
Check out this thread

http://eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=347499

Also, I feel that if you move up in the company, doctorate gives you (and the company) more credibility and professionalism. Similar to having P.Eng. or not (of course I mean this as an indirect comparison).

Bottom line when applying is to answer that question above really well and they will for sure be interested in you.


"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." L. da Vinci
- Gian

 

[Maui]

SwimBikeRun4243, you should perform a search on this website by typing PhD into the search bar and read the discussions that you find. It will be eye-opening. I strongly suggest that you consider my comments in the following discussions:

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=156572

Maui

http://www.EngineeringMetallurgy.com

 

[FeX32]

My suggestion. Do it if you are creative and are very motivated.
Be smart about industrial positions and things will work out great.
Compensation wise, you may not see a big difference at the beginning of your career. But later, you will be glad you got that degree.

Cheers,


"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." L. da Vinci
- Gian

 

[FeX32]

BTW, very thoughtful comments Maui.


"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." L. da Vinci
- Gian

 

[KENAT]

I'd tend to agree with what IRstuff put for the aero/defense industry.

Possible exceptions are defense research organizations - especially some of the govt labs etc. Also to reach the senior positions in some analysis departments, such as structure or aero, of large organizations it may be of use - however generally for management roles it wouldn't be a positive and may sometimes be a negative.

I'm now out of aero/defense and in scientific instrumentation/nanotechnology & having a Phd is often a plus - most of our recent hires have Phd's, though I'm not sure their pay is particularly impressive or much higher than bachelors with equivalent experience.

Now, whether that Phd actually makes them better engineers than folks without the Phd, well that's another matter entirely. Sadly my experience with Phd's at this place has reduced my opinion of them. Not to say there haven't been some very smart & impressive ones - like my current manager. However, many of them don't seem any better (sometimes worse) than those of us with Bachelors or Masters not just in the day to day nitty gritty but even in the more blue skies stuff.

Also several of our VP's & directors have Phds though I'm far from convinced it necessarily makes them better leaders.

[Full disclosure, I'm pretty much bringing up the bottom of the bell curve in our engineering department these days but I have certain applied skills & abilities that have kept me around so far. So take anything I say to impugn those better qualified than me with an appropriate pinch of salt.]

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[Maui]

Thanks FeX32.

http://www.EngineeringMetallurgy.com

 

[SwimBikeRun4342]

I really appreciate all the responses here. Thank you.

I do not know if this will influence the discussion at all but here is some more info:

1) The PhD would be funded
2) I am a US citizen
3) The University is well regarded in Aero Engineering (Purdue)

 

[MacGyverS2000]

Boilermaker here... if you can get a funded PhD from Purdue, I'd consider it more thoroughly than if it were from some no-name place (not just Purdue, but any good school). Purdue engineering is typically ranked in the top 20 for the country (EE was ranked 9th when I graduated with my MS).

Dan - Owner

http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com