Why is this part of the forum called "Aerospace and Astronautics Engineering"?

  • Thread starter Thread starter John Mcrain
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The forum title "Aerospace and Astronautics Engineering" raises questions about clarity, as aerospace encompasses both aeronautics and astronautics. Participants argue that the title could be simplified to "Aerospace Engineering" or "Aeronautics and Astronautics Engineering" to avoid confusion. The distinction between planes, which rely on aerodynamic properties, and rockets, which do not, is central to the discussion. Some members feel that the current title is unprofessional and does not accurately reflect the fields it represents. The forum moderators acknowledge the ongoing debate and express openness to renaming the section for better clarity.
John Mcrain
Messages
435
Reaction score
28
Why this part of forum is called " Aerospace and Astronautics Engineering "?
This don't make sense,because aerospace has two branches:aeronautics and astronautics.
So it will makse sense to call it only "aerospace engineering" or "aeronautics and astronautics engineering"
 
  • Like
Likes atyy, lomidrevo and Wrichik Basu
Physics news on Phys.org
It is a discussion about clarity: are planes and rockets the same thing ort not? The double mention should avoid discussions at the other end of the definition. A rocket has no significant aerodynamical properties (with a grain of salt), whereas planes are more or less defined by those properties.
 
fresh_42 said:
It is a discussion about clarity: are planes and rockets the same thing ort not? The double mention should avoid discussions at the other end of the definition. A rocket has no significant aerodynamical properties (with a grain of salt), whereas planes are more or less defined by those properties.
I don understand you explanation..

Word aerospace include aeronautics and astronautics,so current title don't make sense.
Like you say "Internal combusiton engines and two-stroke engines"..
Two-stroke engines belong to internal combustion engines..
 
  • Like
Likes atyy and Wrichik Basu
John Mcrain said:
I don understand you explanation..

Word aerospace include aeronautics and astronautics,so current title don't make sense.
Like you say "Internal combusiton engines and two-stroke engines"..
Two-stroke engines belong to internal combustion engines..
I am used to distinguish air and space, so I find it natural that they are mentioned both. In the end it is a definition. One which does not explain itself, since aero means air, not space.
 
gmax137 said:
I think @John Mcrain has a point.
We have a discussion thread going in the Mentor forums about this. It's been difficult to figure out the best name for that forum in the past, but we are open for improvements. Stay tuned please... :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes atyy
fresh_42 said:
I am used to distinguish air and space, so I find it natural that they are mentioned both.
Aero-space has both.
 
berkeman said:
We have a discussion thread going in the Mentor forums about this. It's been difficult to figure out the best name for that forum in the past, but we are open for improvements. Stay tuned please... :smile:
I don't think it is a big deal. A rose by any other name...
 
  • Like
Likes Wrichik Basu, DaveE, Astronuc and 1 other person
gmax137 said:
I don't think it is a big deal. A rose by any other name...
Yes it is not big deal but it is unprofessional.
 
  • #10
John Mcrain said:
Yes it is not big deal but it is unprofessional.
Looks like the PF elves fixed that.

1600369985491.png
 
  • Like
Likes John Mcrain, Astronuc, atyy and 1 other person
Back
Top