<p>For A while I was fixed on Civil & Environmental engineering and I was going to specialize in Structural Engineering, but after doing research on the Navy (which I plan to enter and which I currently have a pending NROTC scholarship for) and the different jobs one can have in the Navy I came across Nuclear Engineering and it captured my interest. My general desire to go into engineering is attributed to my joy of physics, problem solving, and knowing how things work. I feel I would be more fulfilled doing nuclear engineering than Civil Engineering. I also know nuclear engineering has many different applications from medical to weapon usage. On the ship id be a naval reactor engineer working with the the nuclear propulsion system of the ship and that to me sounds more exciting. I would also get paid more being a nuclear engineer and my skills from the navy, i believe, would be easily transferable to the civilian world if I decide to leave the Navy. I know so far I sound pretty one sided, as if I had already made up my mind, but I would like input on either fields to help me better make a decision. I don't like making decisions on a whim; I literately learned about Nuclear Engineering this weekend. So thank you, any input would be appreciated. I also need to make this decision soon, because my NROTC scholarship application says I wan to be a Civil Engineer.</p>
<p>I’d recommend Civil. The future of nuclear is a real toss-up at this point - you never know when another accident will set the technology back another decade. The future of houses, bridges, and the like is far less uncertain.</p>
<p>The idea of nuclear (as a career) is quite great. The reality really isn’t.</p>
<p>I know a guy with a degree in Nuclear Engineering from Penn State. He can’t even find a job in engineering, much less nuclear engineering.</p>
<p>He barely makes a living selling real estate.</p>
<p>^^^and I know a EE who’s in the same boat…</p>
<p>Nuclear is a competitive field (it’s not HOT like CS), you have to keep your GPA up, and try to work an internship or co-op to help break into the field. No better internship ($$) than the Navy. </p>
<p>You really first need to decide how much of a career do you want in the Navy (and then possible in civil service). As Neodymium pointed out, there are risk with this industry (2 years ago it looked hot, then we had ***ushima in Japan…). The Navy does pay a premium for Nuke’s, so look into it. Of course, Nuclear Medicine is a field that’s not impacted by the Energy side of the business, but that may not fit well with your plans for the Navy (based on how long you want to stay in the Navy…and your career plans).</p>
<p>Good Luck!</p>
<p>Why not kill two birds with one stone. Get an appointment to the Naval Academy and major in Nuclear Engineering. No tuition and guarenteed job for six years after you graduate.</p>
<p>If they are paying for your college do the navy thing if not don’t waste your time, you will be stuck on the ship for a long time and life is going to suck! If you get an engineering degree the military is one of the worst options, the humanities degree officer will get paid the same and do no work! Only difference is the bonus!!!
~navy veteran~ currently aerospace engineering sophomore!</p>
<p>
A very valid point on the civilian side, although military nuke technology is still going strong. So I would avoid NE if you are dead set against a career in or supporting the military.</p>
<p>
So do I, but this guy has been gainfully employed at a Navy Yard working on sub reactors for the last few years.</p>
<p>
He already has an NROTC spot, and Academy openings are both hard to get AND oriented towards career officers.</p>
<p>
There is a lot of bitterness in this post, but some truth to it as well. As a nuke you would spend a lot of time at sea and that is NOT for everyone. You do get paid the same as everyone else, despite having a tougher job - the retention bonuses for staying in are nice, but not compared to civilian employment. Of course, as a civil engineer in the navy it will be less interesting (I think), there will be NO bonus, and instead of being at sea you will just find yourself deployed somewhere else. Personally, I would take reactor officer on a sub way before I would want to be running a Seabee team in Afghanistan…</p>
<p>^^^^ no bitterness just the hard truth I knew a bunch of our nuke officers who which would have done something different! I turned down 50k bonus because when you are out see for 8 months you work 15 hrs a day sometimes more the officers work more! It’s just something they won’t tell you! So if you have an engineering degree which you paid for, why join the military to make less money? Unless you end up like a few of our officers low gpa and couldn’t find a job! Again some got a full ride to join the military so they would say this is my punishment for free college! I’m not bitter I’m going to college for free thanks to it! Just sharing the complete truth behind it, remember these folks are getting paid to ensure engineers join!!</p>
<p>Since he’s already planning on joining the navy (via NROTC), it’s perfectly valid to look into Nuclear Engineering vs. Civil.</p>
<p>The Navy has a (good) website about Nuclear Energy Careers:</p>
<p>[Nuclear</a> Energy Careers: Navy.com](<a href=“http://www.navy.com/careers/nuclear-energy/?campaign=search_Reprise/Google/Nuclear+Navy/%2Bnavy%20nuclear/mkwid/sjB2suUC0|dc/pcrid/5239696596/pmt/b]Nuclear”>http://www.navy.com/careers/nuclear-energy/?campaign=search_Reprise/Google/Nuclear+Navy/%2Bnavy%20nuclear/mkwid/sjB2suUC0|dc/pcrid/5239696596/pmt/b)</p>
<p>
You really limit your options if the military, a very questionably desirable employer, is your only choice.</p>
<p>
It is not just working directly for the military, most of the work designing, building, installing, repairing, and removing shipboard reactors is performed by civilians working for defense contractors. The pay and benefits are a lot better than the military, although still not as good as commercial power generation.</p>
<p>Still, my point is that finding jobs in commercial power generation can be difficult at times and may become more difficult in the future. That is why I would not go into NucE if you are strictly opposed to supporting military reactors - it may be your only attainable source of employment!</p>
<p>
I’d say it’s dangerous as a career choice to go into an industry where your skills are marketable to only one group. If they stop buying or they become unreasonable to work with, what then?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t see any bitterness. Why would anyone be bitter?</p>