[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Science-Technology Title: Multiple retirements leave Air Force facing a shortage of researchers DAYTON, Ohio — The number of scientists and engineers retiring at the Air Force’s top science research agency has doubled in the last five years, and defense experts say the trend could lead to a shortage because a growing number of highly trained workers are eligible to leave. The Air Force Research Laboratory, headquartered at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio, has a workforce with about half the employees age 50 or older. This year, 20 percent of the agency’s scientists and engineers were eligible for retirement; by 2018, that figure will reach 33 percent. The Air Force reportedly has lost nearly 30 percent of its top senior scientists the last two years, as well. Former Lockheed Martin Corp. Chairman Norman R. Augustine said he expects a future shortage of engineers and scientists, which could impact national security. For decades, the United States has relied on superior technology to maintain an edge against adversaries. “I do think it puts us at risk, and one of the greatest dangers is, it takes a long time” to find replacements, said Augustine, a co-chairman of a National Academy of Sciences committee in 2012 that reviewed the status of the science, technology, engineering and math, or STEM, workforce in the Department of Defense and U.S. defense industry. “You don’t just turn the spigot on and say we’ll have more engineers.” A 2010 National Academy of Sciences study projected a shortage of scientists and engineers between 2015 and 2020, said George K. Muellner, a former Boeing Co. executive who was a co-chairman of the review. Budget instability caused last year by sequestration — from civilian furloughs to grounded jets — could hurt Air Force recruitment of civilian scientists and engineers, the retired Air Force lieutenant general said. “To be frank, if they’re not able to start providing some stability to the folks they hire, they’re not going to compete well at all,” said Muellner, a past president of the American Association of Astronautics and Aeronautics. The status of the Department of Defense science and engineering workforce has attracted the attention of Congress. As part of the fiscal year 2014 National Defense Authorization Act, lawmakers required the Pentagon to report on STEM workforce needs by last March. The Defense Department missed the deadline but says a report will be released. The military and defense and national security contractors face the challenge of competing for a limited number of graduate school students. Many students in U.S. graduate schools are foreign citizens not eligible for security clearances. “Now you’ve cut the pool of graduate students in half that we’re eligible to go after, and of the half that’s left, we’re competing with industries that are more lucrative,” said Scott Coale, a retired colonel and former vice commander of the Air Force Research Lab, or AFRL. To work on a classified project at a Department of Defense lab, a scientist or engineer must be a U.S. citizen with a security clearance, said Pamela Swann, AFRL deputy director of personnel. In limited circumstances, AFRL may employ foreign-born scientists or engineers who have a green card, or permanent U.S. residency but who do not work on classified projects, she said. The 2010 study that reviewed the Air Force’s STEM needs noted “reason for concern as to whether the supply of scientists and engineers who can obtain a security clearance will be adequate to meet the future needs of the Air Force.” The report on STEM needs said that while science and engineering degrees awarded increased 8 percent between 2000 and 2005, the number of those degrees awarded to U.S. citizens and permanent residents fell 5.5 percent. It also said women and minorities were a growing segment of potential recruits. It urged the Air Force to take a “proactive role” to address shortfalls in math and science skills among middle and high school students. Augustine said U.S. high school students fare poorly in international science and math tests and often have not shown the kind of interest in STEM careers their counterparts in other countries have demonstrated. William Gruff · Due to big-ticket items like new atomic submarines, aircraft carriers, the F-35, new atomic weapons, etc, the US has not had many resources left over to spend on improving their cruise missiles. Money isn't even the biggest constraint. The biggest resource shortage is engineers. Defense contractors cannot use Chinese, Russian, Indian or other foreign engineers working in the US on H1 visas because these engineers cannot get security clearance to work on defense projects. Few Americans are studying science or engineering these days because it is hard, and there are easier jobs that pay better. China, Russia, and India, on the other hand, have lots and lots of engineers. China in particular has engineers coming out of their ears. They have so many engineers they don't know what to do with them all. Westerners like to imagine America has lots of "secret black weapons", but the resources to make these projects a reality simply do not exist. Now, China on the other hand... they have resources for lots of kick-butt "secret black weapons". Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 17.
#3. To: A Pole (#0)
Students are brainwashed and taking courses in social activism that lead to careers in politics and law rather than science and engineering. We are producing generations that know how to run their mouth, but not much of anything else. Subversion is the new favored curriculum.
Actually, students are taking lots of courses in business. Business is a very popular major. And for the record, scientists and engineers work FOR businessmen. Law is harder than engineering. I've done both. Sure, to just get a law degree is not as hard as getting an engineering degree. But all law degrees are not created equal. To get into a top law school - which you have to do to be able to make a good living at law - is very hard. Once you're out of engineering school, there are all sorts of jobs for you. Out of law school, your first job depends on where you went, but actually succeeding in law practice is a bitch, because another intelligent person is always working directly against you. Law is a combat sport. Engineering is not. Learning engineering is harder at the beginning (although actually learning to write VERY WELL is more difficult than learning to do mathematics very well. Starting writing is easy - everybody knows how to speak his own language, but then progressing to truly superior writing is quite hard, in part because what qualifies as "superior" in writing is quite subjective). Should kids study engineering and science instead of business? I'll leave that up to you to decide. But law is its own subject, and to be a top-tier lawyer and stay there is harder than to be an engineer.
There are no replies to Comment # 17. End Trace Mode for Comment # 17.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|