University of Toronto EngSci VS Ryerson Aerospace Engineering

[jamdurak]

Hi everyone,

I'm sorry if this has been discussed before but I am in a real pickle here.

I want to be an Aerospace Engineer and eventually an entrepreneur in the field (hopefully.lol).

I have been accepted to both the UofT Engineering Science Program (which offers Aerospace as an elective in the 3rd and 4th years) and the Aerospace Engineering Program at Ryerson Univeristy.

I am wildly conflicted. UofT EngSci is a very tough program and a lot of students complain and drop out or end up with lower than average GPAs. Some students were of the opinion that most employers don't even know what EngSci is. On the contrary it is ranked as one of the best Engineering programs in the world and I would have a broader base in more engineering disciplines(1st 2nd year are common to all EngSci students). This might be an advantage as i hope to establish my own aerospace company in Pakistan (I am from Pakistan). It is also a few thousand dollars more expensive than Ryerson.

Ryerson students on the other hand have an easier time and they have the opportunity to intern through the Ryerson Institute for Aerospace Design and Innovation (RIADI) at aerospace giants like Pratt and Whitney and Bombardier. So there is more relevant work experience at Ryerson. Ryerson is not ranked as well as UofT's EngSci though.

I hope to pursue a graduate degree after bachelor's and would greatly appreciate any advice I can get.

 

[Hologram0110]

I have heard exceptional things about UOT EngSci. I have also heard as you have that it is an extremely challenging course load with high academic standards. I have also heard that Ryerson has a more engineering & practical approach. (Disclaimer, I attended Queen's Eng Phys not UOT/Ryerson so this is hearsay).

Personally, I would say if you think that you are up to the challenge of EngSci then do it. Your undergrad is something you will have the rest of your life, and it isn't something you want to halfass. That being said, if you know your own limitations or would like to have more of a social/extracurricular life, Ryerson might be best.

 

[iratern]

Hi, sorry if I'm kindda thread hijacking, but Hologram I would like to ask you about Queen's Eng Physics. I am between U of T Physics and Queen's Eng Phy. How is the program how challenging is it ( I enjoy being challenged, and I'm up for one)? How is Kingston, how are the residences?

Any input you have would be greatly appreciated thanx.

 

[Hologram0110]

Queen's Eng Phys was great. There are some really nice things about it.

-Like the common first year, so choosing Queen's still offers a lot of choice in case you decide you would rather do something like like Apple Math (Applied Math stream of Engineering at Queens)
-The programs are non-competitive, meaning once you get in, you don't have to worry about getting back in each year (unless you fail a lot of courses). This is nice because while the classes are still academically challenging you won't get kicked out for getting a 60 in a course. Also, the students tend to be very helpful with each other because you are not competing for spots in the undergraduate programs.
-There is a fair amount of flexibility in courses. You select one of 4 streams to focus on, Electrical, Mechanical, Computing, Materials. You then take your physics courses with EngPhys, but take a number of courses in that field. You also get 3 courses to take which cannot be in anything technical (I took econ and a philosophy class, but you can take art, languages or humanities courses).
-The residences are nothing special (neither bad nor good). Most of them are kind of old but still work. The west campus residences are actually nicer, but much further from class then the rest of them. Most students only spend first year in res then get offcampus housing (thats what I did). I had a great time in res in first year, most other people I know did too.
-There is a semipractical nature to it. It is generally a more marketable & flexible than a pure physics degree (unless you want pure phys grad school).
-Kingston is a much smaller city compared to Toronto, so there are some differences. I've always found everything I need here. Campus is also nice and compact compared to UOT.

Hope that helps. Let me know if you have any more questions.

 

[iratern]

Great, so if I want to go into, like aerosapce research (as in rocket propulsion0 that would be my best option. How would you compare the program to U of T engi Sci physics?

 

[Hologram0110]

For something like aerosapce after your undergrad I don't think the differences in courses would mean much at all. UOT is better known school and probably harder program which might help you get a job, not that Queen's a bad school. However, the reality is that after either undergrad you won't be in a position to design rockets without additional training anyways. Ie You'll only be qualified for entry level engineering work until you develop work experience anyways. Between the two, you can't really make a bad choice.

Alternatively, if you are sure that you want to go into aerospace (like at Ryerson for example) you might want to consider an aerospace specific program. While EngSci/EngPhys may be more challenging, a very large chunk of the most difficult physics I learned is is no way applicable to aerospace, so I'm not sure it is worth it. Now that I've completed my EngPhys degree it seems more like a very broad stepping stone to grad school (although some people did go into industry). Everything I know about EngSci at UOT leads me to the same conclusion. If you want to go to industry and work and an engineer, there are easier, more direct (and potentially more useful) paths. IF you don't know EngPhys//EngSci are good broad choices.

 

[jamdurak]

Hologram0110 I am wildly conflicted here.

I eventually want to start my own Aerospace thing in Pakistan (and design my own aircraft or something..yes I am overambitious.lol).. I do plan to go to Grad School..i want to know if the BASc degree at UofT EngSci is alright for this..some of my friends at Ryerson suggest that only if you get a BE(Aero) will you be an engineer and get an engineering job. I am worried.

 

[Hologram0110]

If you are planing on doing grad school that will matter significantly more than where/what your undergrad is. Your undergrad in this case will serve to teach you the math and basic science, some of the engineering techniques and the language required for grad-school and industry.

Personally, I think that EngSci is pretty much designed to make you a well prepared grad student in a wide range of fields. If you do EngSci and then get a masters in aerospace or CFD or another area useful to aerospace then it will put you in a great position to get a job with an aerospace company and get the engineering experience you need to work on your own.

I say this because EngSci is such a comprehensive program that will force you to do more advanced math and touch on more subjects. It will also force you to learn a lot of stuff not directly related to aerospace which you might see as a waste of time. Ryerson on the other hand offers a targeted program designed to teach you enough to get you into industry right out of undergrad. That isn't to say that you can't do grad school after, but that isn't the intent of the program.

There are also coursework+project masters at many universities (usually 1 year programs) that allow you to take more advanced courses without having to do a thesis. You might want to consider one of these if you want to jump into industry instead of a research oriented position.

At this stage it sounds to me like you can't really go wrong. Either choice still positions you to do what you want to do. You might want to start looking at some other factors like the atmosphere of the school to help you decide one way or another.

 

[Heresy]

I've been well exposed to Engineering Science students at my residence, about 30% of the students here are engineers and most of them are in EngSci.

It's a great program and it's not behind on the practical aspect as well (there's the famous bridge project in first semester, Praxis presentation in second semester... and everyone knows about the robot everyone has to build at the end of second year for AER201, along with the 300-page report lol). Great thing is you have 2 years to decide on what you really want, and there are a ton of options.

As I'm still in undergrad I have no idea about job opportunities and grad school outlooks after completing the program, but I can easily say that it's definitely the hardest program here at UofT when you take the material+workload into account.

 

[iratern]

Actually my plan was to get a degree in Eng Physics from Queen's or a Physics degree from U of T, and then get a aerospace masters. I was just wondering which way to go. I have checked some master/phd programs and as far as rocket propulsion goes, they say that it is mainly based on plasma phyics and electromagnetism (depending on the type of rocket), so I am just undecided between those 2 degrees.

I eventually want to go to a place like MIT to study aerospace. I just need to able to compare these 2 programs more before I can make a decision.

thanx in advance...

 

[Salviati]

I'm probably going to fail a 3rd year physics course at utoronto so if you want to do me a personal favour and strap the university for some cash, don't come here. :)

 

[iratern]

lol is it that bad? like I don't mind a challenge but if its just a plain dumb class then I would hate it. Are you a specialist? how is it like? the uni? what about res? your college? I need info cause I am going crazy between Queen's eng phy and toronto physics...

 

[aeroeng]

ryerson aerospace is the best aerospace UNDERGRAD in Canada.. and utias is supposedly the best for GRAD studies however much of aero RESEARCH is done in RYERSON and not at uft, including those done by utias students.. trust me i work at bombardier.. and ryerson is the uni we turn to for help..

eng sci is not even accreditted and u cannot get ur p_eng with that degree.. i have heard good things about it and heard that it is quite a challenging course.. but i have also heard much that is bad - these guys think they r the best but crumble in a real world situation..

trust me.. u cannot learn to be an engineer u either r one or ur not.. regardless of which program u attend, at the end of it, you will have learned nothing about engineering except whether it is meant for you or not.. if u feel at the end of ur degree that u have learned something, consider a different career..

any idiot can solve a textbook problem, but when u get into the real world.. everything crumbles.. making a box is difficult.. riadi offers internships and that's really where u learn how to be an engineer.. uft has no such program although some are lucky at uft.. ryerson has wayyyy more exposure.. many senior engineers in the industry is a ryerson grads and like to hire out of ryerson just because the know what the students are capable of.

my recomendation - ryerson for undergrad.. none better.. beyond that.. depends on u..

 

[glueball8]

@aeroeng: "trust me.. u cannot learn to be an engineer u either r one or ur not..." people who thinks like this will never be successful.

@jamdurk: You'll well prepared either way, but its is likely you'll have a hard time at engsci. But you will learn more about other areas, meet smart people (though you might have less social life.) and have better problem solving scales. I heard queen's eng physics is also very good.

It really depends what you want. And the environment you'll be in.

 

[juliette sekx]

I don't have any insight regarding which choice to make, but:

eng sci is not even accreditted and u cannot get ur p_eng with that degree..

You are SO wrong, and very unethical for blatantly *lying* on a thread where someone was really trying to seek advice for an important decision.

I know dozens of people that did Eng.Sci. and got their P.Eng.

You don't believe me ? Google "university of toronto P.Eng. engineering science" and you rapidly get examples of people with the Eng.Sci. degree that have a P.Eng., one of them: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/aliceyutoronto


Your username is 'aeroeng' , clearly it designed particularly for this thread, and that was your only post on this forum, meaning you joined just to falsely discredit UofT's program and advertise Ryerson's.

Can someone please remove this user ?

 

[KaFOFO]

juliette_sekx you are right about Eng.Sci being accredited by CEAB:
proof: http://www.engineering.utoronto.ca/Assets/AppSci+Digital+Assets/pdf/Memos/CyclicalReviewsandQualityAssurance_Feb2010.pdf (2nd page, 2nd paragraph)

I am not exactly sure what the difference would be with getting a "BASc Engineering Science" and 'BEng Aerospace Engineering". Maybe applying to grad school would effect this? I don't really know.

For people looking to whether go to Ryerson or UofT for aerospace, think about what you want exactly.

• **Then go see what courses you will be doing for each program.**

• If Engineering Science specializes in aerospace in 3rd/4th yr then see what courses you might be missing out on. Or maybe you won't miss out at all but will need to work harder to make up for lost time (since Ryerson gives aerospace courses throughout the degree).

• Also looking at the student groups might be helpful (seeing what aerospace specific student teams there which will be for gaining experience before getting a real job).

I am personally from Ryerson University. If you have any particular questions about Ryerson's Aerospace Engineering program then pm me.

 

[juliette sekx]

KaFOFO's advice is really good.
Check out the descriptions of the courses, that can be very useful.

As for:
"I am not exactly sure what the difference would be with getting a "BASc Engineering Science" and 'BEng Aerospace Engineering". Maybe applying to grad school would effect this? I don't really know."


The name of your degree means absolutely NOTHING.
I can't emphasize the word 'NOTHING' enough.

If you do math at Waterloo, you get a B.Math. [bachelor of mathematics]
If you do math at MIT, you get a B.Sc. in Mathematics [bachelor of science in mathematics]
At some places it's a B.A. in Mathematics [bachelor of ARTS in mathematics]

UofT gives BASc's for engineering, waterloo gives BEng's

At Oxford there's at least 5 different types of masters degrees:
MA, MSc, MSt, MEng, MPhil,

but not one of them is better than any of the others.

The difference in nomenclature is just a stupid leftover thing that remains for historical reasons - they should all really be called the same thing.

Don't look at the NAME of the degree, look at the specific courses offered by the program. That's what grad schools do, regardless of what you think or want to think.

 

[Santhiya]

@KaFOFO: I have applied for MEng aerospace in ryerson. how about the program?
How about job oppurtunities there in Canada after course completion(am Indian).

 

[╔(σ_σ)╝]

I go to Ryerson myself and my honest opinion is to go wherever you feel like going to.

In the end it doesn't really matter if you go to UofT for your Ugrad; you can always go to Ryerson for your masters or vise versa.

I have had TA's from UofT at ryerson. I have also know students who have continued to pursue grad studies at Uoft after their Ugrad from Ryerson.

In the end they all seem happy with THEIR decisions. Make your decision by yourself so that you do not end up regretting what you did. If I were to tell you Ryerson was the best university, you came here and hated it how would you feel ? Likewise, the same is true for Uoft.

Make an informed decision not a biased one. To tell you the truth that whole thing about employment of Ryerson Students is fails.

I know Ryerson Aero students who graduated without job offers, partly because they were poor students or simply were not lucky.