what's more important for engineering? background mechanism or methods

[milanbuffon]

I'm a new comer of aerospace engineering in postgraduate study. I wonder which is more important for engineering research work, the background knowledge,i.e.,the underlying mechanism(e.g. dynamics) or methods we employ(i.e. control theory)? In other words, is the understanding of the model of the problems, or is the methods we use for the solution, more important?

 

For instance, I may study on the navigation of spacecraft descending on Mars. Then what should I concern more? The dynamics of the descending objects or the methods of state estimation(e.g. filtering)?

 

Hope someone can help me what the most important thing is in engineering. Thanks in advance!

[CaptainPanic]

I think you need to grasp the mechanism before you can apply a method. So, you need both.

 

If you understand only the mechanism, then you are a scientist (sorry scientists, for painting this picture so black and white).

If you apply only a method, you're an 'operator'.

 

You're only an engineer if you can do both.

 

Obviously, in the real world, it's all a bit more blurred.

[milanbuffon]

I think you need to grasp the mechanism before you can apply a method. So, you need both.

 

If you understand only the mechanism, then you are a scientist (sorry scientists, for painting this picture so black and white).

If you apply only a method, you're an 'operator'.

 

You're only an engineer if you can do both.

 

Obviously, in the real world, it's all a bit more blurred.

Thanks Captain. It needs a lot of work so. Hope to achieve it.

[CaptainPanic]

Thanks Captain. It needs a lot of work so. Hope to achieve it.

Yes, it takes an effort to become an engineer. But I can say from experience that it's worth it.