Gianp80
Guest
....I want you to do what you want you can only give it to you and only experience....and to have it you have to break a lot...
Your sermons are always stimulating so don't think too much about it. For the second part, you could subtitle them on page 777.(cut)... clearly the second option entitles me, but it would mean "to break" another sermon.
I'll think about it.
p.s.: How do I make sure that my interventions are kept in the right consideration even if apparently "criptics"?
:smile:
But I want to try....I want to be a free professional from great,I don't want to get tired...according to you it's risky to do aerospace with the intention of not wanting to get into all the costs in the aviation industry?Your sermons are always stimulating so don't think too much about it. For the second part, you could subtitle them on page 777.
However what you say has a foundation of truth. I was going to recommend them the way of the sighting. If you're wrong, you can always do the honour.
if he likes it "... deepen certain aspects such as fluid dynamics, aerodynamics and imposing buildings" and also "...study on your own, I learned from myself the cad programs, I learned from myself to use ansys, and other stuff.. what I want is to have a broad knowledge, in order to have the word in every sector. " Perhaps a specialist is not enough. what I mean is that it is difficult to be "genericly competent". It should be limited to choosing a subject and deepening as much as possible the aspects that concern it.
But I understand it's difficult.
but is this the point, a free professional in which sector? It's this choice that will condition the rest of your life.But I want to try... .I want to be a free professional from great,I don't want to get tired... according to you it's worth aerospace with the intention of not wanting to get into all the costs in the aviation industry?
purtrope can be that with aerospace you can not still design planes.. .no, awareness of the Italian situation. I just want to see if with aerospace I'm destined exclusively for planes all here.
not to count that a specific preparation in a well-defined field denotes clear ideas, often well evaluated by companies.Your sermons are always stimulating so don't think too much about it. For the second part, you could subtitle them on page 777.
However what you say has a foundation of truth. I was going to recommend them the way of the sighting. If you're wrong, you can always do the honour.
if he likes it "... deepen certain aspects such as fluid dynamics, aerodynamics and imposing buildings" and also "...study on your own, I learned from myself the cad programs, I learned from myself to use ansys, and other stuff.. what I want is to have a broad knowledge, in order to have the word in every sector. " Perhaps a specialist is not enough. what I mean is that it is difficult to be "genericly competent". It should be limited to choosing a subject and deepening as much as possible the aspects that concern it.
But I understand it's difficult.
quoto michele81.purtrope can be that with aerospace you can not still design planes.. .
to be a consultant and a freelancer is not enough school preparation and not even the one resulting from personal interest but needs experience. and experience must be specific to the sector in which you want to operate. or you can try the path of "inventor" (I know different unfortunately) that try to propose to companies new "technologies" and patents that in 90% of cases are inseparable, but in 10% can bring earnings (thanks to a strong investment and a commercial network. ..
to conclude: until 30 years ago it was enough to be an engineer to apply in any field, now it is much more sectoral and specific both preparation and demand.
I'll be brief.If I wanted to be fun, I wrote a joke.
Anyway, I'm "removing" an answer and I'm at a crossroads. I could answer you on the personal level, with a "contingent" assessment on what, for me, would be better.
or I could (I would, I would like) answer you by addressing the problem "philosophical" coming out, therefore, from the specific context.
clearly the second option entitles me, but it would mean "to break" another sermon.
I'll think about it.
p.s.: How do I make sure that my interventions are kept in the right consideration even if apparently "criptics"?
:smile:
quoto! the "buzzo", it takes of the "buzzo", otherwise will flourish the suppliers of lauree via web in 5 working days. . .p.p.s.: put some heart in things! by caxxo!!! ! !
:smile:
I understand!ok enough, fuck it all (you hear Frenchism)...I like fluidodynamics and aerodynamics and I will study those!thank you all!quoto! the "buzzo", it takes of the "buzzo", otherwise will flourish the suppliers of lauree via web in 5 working days. . .
Good boy! always follow your skills and remember, today as today does not count to participate, but to win.I understand!ok enough, fuck it all (you hear Frenchism)...I like fluidodynamics and aerodynamics and I will study those!thank you all!