Aerodynamics Engineer (Mid-Level) vs Satellite Systems Engineer (Mid-Level)

Aerodynamics Engineer (Mid-Level): The most simulation-heavy aerospace subspecialty -- 50% of task time in CFD and shape optimisation scores 3, where AI surrogate models, physics-informed neural networks, and automated meshing are production-ready. Wind tunnel work (15% of time) provides genuine physical protection but less than propulsion or satellite roles. Defence-sector aerodynamicists with security clearances are meaningfully safer due to ITAR tool-access restrictions. Bimodal: wind-tunnel-heavy aero engineers closer to Green; pure computational aero engineers closer to borderline Red. At 38.8, this role sits 7.5 points below the Aerospace Engineer parent (46.3) and 10.9 below Propulsion Engineer (49.7) -- the gap is explained by lower barriers and heavier concentration of AI-exposed simulation work. Adapt within 3-5 years.

Satellite Systems Engineer (Mid-Level): End-to-end satellite architecture, requirements flow-down, and hands-on integration and test create systems-level judgment that AI agents cannot replicate — while physical I&T in clean rooms, thermal vacuum chambers, and vibration facilities provides strong embodied protection. At 50.6, this role clears the Green threshold by 2.6 points, driven by booming space industry demand and physical testing moats. Safe for 5+ years with active AI tool adoption.