2024 Conference Abstracts – The Final Week’s Countdown

Have you dreamed of enhancing your career, advancing within your company, being admired by your peers and supervisors? A well-proven way of doing this and more is by writing and presenting a paper at an International Conference.  Even better is receiving recognition at a conference for your work.  And how do you do that?  Be sure that your paper is judged, because if it misses the judging, it will miss out on consideration for Best Paper or Special Recognition.  

One final question, is this a big deal?  The answer to that is definitely YES!, as I can tell you from experience. The fact that my paper garnered a Best Paper award led directly to promotion and plum assignments at work and to a satisfying series of leadership positions within the SAWE.

The Society of Allied Weight Engineers 2024 Conference on Mass Properties Engineering is coming in May.  Abstracts for Professional (not Student) papers to be presented at the conference are due to be received by the SAWE by midnight on January 19, 2024 for the paper to be eligible for judging for the Mike Hackney Best Paper Award.  Similarly, the paper itself is due by midnight on April 15, 2024 to meet the criteria for Best Paper judging.  Both milestones must be met to ensure the paper is included in the judging.  Abstracts (and papers can be submitted via the web at https://www.sawe.org/technical/papers/submittal or by sending them by email to technical@sawe.org. Papers that miss the deadlines may still be submitted and presented, however they will not be considered for Best Paper.  

So, I ask you again – Have you dreamed of enhancing your career?  Act on your dreams and reap the rewards.

Why Should You Become a Mentee?

I am an accomplished mass properties engineer.  I retired from a major aerospace company as a member of the Senior Engineering Staff.  I have certification as an Expert Mass Properties Engineer (EMPE), and having served the SAWE in multiple capacities, I have been awarded the Richard Boynton Lifetime Achievement Award.  However, I wasn’t always the engineer I am today.

Once upon a time, I was a fresh-faced college graduate who started my first real engineering job at one of the aircraft companies in Wichita.  I did not run across a fairy godmother who waved her magic wand and proclaimed, “You are now a mass properties guru.”  Until I had my interview at the company, I had not even heard of mass properties engineering.  Most of what I now know regarding mass properties came from learning from others – on the job and off the job training, reading, observing, and asking questions.  Every one of these methods involves transfer of knowledge from one or more people to another.  

Some of this knowledge transfer is eye opening, setting the stage for later use.  As an example, while in college I went to one of my professors, Dr. Langer, with a question.  I don’t even remember what the question was and what the answer he gave was, because what struck me was something I observed, and used extensively in my career.  He was sitting cross-legged on his desk, a pad of paper on one knee and a textbook on the other.  He was busy writing on the pad.  After our “official” business was over, I asked him what he was doing, and he told me he was going through a textbook. He was considering using it and was verifying that he could reproduce the mathematical equations in the book step-by-step.  In other words, he was both making sure the equations were correct, while also using his knowledge to work out the answer.  He said something I can recall nearly 50 years later, “You might be able to find something in a book, but it is much better for understanding to work it out for yourself.”  That was true mentoring, freely given with the cost of tuition.

At the aircraft company, I had a lot to learn.  Yes, I could determine a volume and multiply by a density to get an object’s mass and calculate its center of gravity.  But – I also knew there was lot I didn’t know.  One day I was asked to determine a balance mass for a control surface.  My brain went into neutral, and I just couldn’t see how to do it.  Had I only remembered Dr. Langer’s advice, I could have come up with the answer.  Instead, I headed back to the senior engineer who had given me the task and confessed I couldn’t see how to calculate the desired balance mass.  Instead of admonishing me, he drew me a diagram and went over the mechanics without working out the answer.  In other words, he mentored me on determining balancing objects.  I was his mentee – and I learned several lessons in this simple session.  First, I learned about balancing.  Secondly, by examining how it was done, I could see how I could have derived the correct formulation of the equation.  Thirdly, I found I could seek out guidance and not be thought a moron. And fourthly, I recalled Dr. Langer’s lesson and realized that even a non-obvious answer can be “discovered” by going back to basics and working from there.

From the aircraft company, I changed companies and found myself working for a major aerospace corporation.  I was initially assigned as an associate engineer to a much older mass properties engineer.  By this time, I had a solid understanding of basic mass properties.  What I learned working for this man was how to thrive in a highly competitive environment, using office politics to your advantage, avoiding pitfalls, and how to ensure that you aren’t the “invisible engineer”.  That isn’t to say that there were not technical challenges to work out, but this era of being a mentee enabled me to be a survivor when the coming downturns meant that 2/3 of the workforce disappeared either through self-induced attrition or layoffs.  But before the downturn, I was given a series of increasingly responsible positions culminating in assignment to a major proposal.  When we won the proposal, I was somewhat deflated to learn that a senior engineer was assigned in the lead mass properties position.  Rather than complain, I decided that here was someone I could really learn from.  He was an SAWE Honorary Fellow, and from him I benefited from his lifetime’s knowledge of technical and non-technical life in aerospace.  I would not have become the engineer I am without having him as a mentor.

I had one more mentee experience having to do with getting a spinning spacecraft to naturally spin about a specific axis.  I called my department head and he came over and tried to explain what that entailed.  Finally, he said something that made me write out the equations and rearrange them until it was obvious what had to be done to get the desired answer.  From that, I wrote a program so that as the design evolved, I could make adjustments to keep the axis aligned.

I took all this knowledge that had been passed to me and utilized it in the years ahead.  As a mentee, I had evolved from a boneheaded neophyte who couldn’t balance a control surface, to the company expert in mass properties.  I became a mentor to others.  I wrote papers, technical articles, led teams to implement mass properties tasks, designed measurement apparatus that could encompass a wide CG range while determining Moments of Inertia.  Along the way I was elected and appointed to leadership positions in the SAWE.  And each step of the way was due to, in the words of Isaac Newton, “Standing on the shoulders of giants,” in other words “l leveraged other’s knowledge to my advantage by being their mentee.”

And this is why, at almost any stage of your career, you should become someone’s mentee.

Becoming a Mentee – “If You Don’t Ask, You Don’t Get”

What common characteristic does a successful Mass Properties Engineer share with a moderately successful 1970’s rock band?  Both have benefited from a philosophy that can be summed up as “If You Don’t Ask, You Don’t Get.”   This was a favorite phrase of my father’s, useful in many aspects of his life.  He used it to get into college at an early age, he used it when he wanted a more desirable route while flying in the IFR (Instrument Flight Rules) system.  He used it to expand his areas of expertise in his chosen field.  And he used it when he acquired automobiles, when choosing  a life partner, and even in his final days to go the way he wished.

To say that anyone can’t learn from this is to ignore sage advice.  The SAWE has taken this philosophy and used it to create a means for transferring knowledge – The SAWE Mentoring Program is in essence a way for our membership to ask for aid in increasing their knowledge and skills.  The program went live at the end of May, we have highly experienced members who volunteered their time and expertise as Mentors.  Now we are actively seeking not only more Mentors, but members who are seeking to expand their own expertise as Mentees.  Even experienced members can find benefit as a Mentee and request a Mentor.  Don’t be shy – be Mentee!

I have been both a Mentee and a Mentor. One situation I had that pushed me to seek a Mentor I have already written about (A Mentoring Odyssey first published in issue 77-2 of Weight Engineering – article available at https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/3z1d5szp7724wk8nimdxi/A-Mentoring-Odyssey-extracted.pdf?rlkey=9iaj2qg06l1a8pfpxhj4wcf7j&dl=0).  The mass properties problem I was trying to solve was definitely a case where “If You Don’t Ask, You Don’t Get” in action.  I asked, became a Mentee seeking Mentor, and the rest is history.

What about that rock group mentioned above?  In 1967, Berkeley dropout Jann Wenner founded a music and counter-culture magazine called Rolling Stone.  It quickly became THE magazine for coverage of the music scene and cultural commentary by writers such as Hunter S. Thompson.  To be featured on the cover of the magazine was a measure of an artist’s prestige.  The very first cover, establishing the magnitude of the featured artist, was John Lennon, then the acknowledged leader of the Beatles.  Thereafter, the cover was a tangible indication that an artist had “arrived”.  By 1972, a group fronted by one-eyed singer Ray Sawyer had seen modest success, with a Shel Silverstein composed song, Sylvia’s Mother, which hit the Top 5. The group wanted more, and Sawyer and Silverstein hit gold with the next song, a classic case of If You Don’t Ask, You Don’t Gethttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuvfIePDbgY.  The song parodied the life of a rock band, but it was basically a request to be featured on the cover of Jann Wenner’s magazine.   Wenner took notice – it was certainly free advertising for him, and the band was featured on his magazine’s cover in March 1973.

What do you need help with?  Contact the SAWE and click the Apply as a Mentee button at https://www.sawe.org/training/mentoring/.

The SAWE Mentoring Program IOC Is Nearly Here

Initial Operating Capability (IOC) – the point in a program’s life when the system achieves sufficient functionality to be usefully deployed.

The Mentoring Committee has been relentlessly charging forward towards the unleashing of the SAWE Mentoring Program at the Cocoa Beach Conference.  The first Mentors have volunteered, the committee has committed to the Charter, the website is nearly complete, and the Mentor Application is online.  Currently the committee is deep into testing the methodology of Mentor/Mentee matching, using a Mentee Application that will soon be online for the general SAWE population to utilize.  At that point, the SAWE Mentoring Program will officially go truly live.

We desire more veteran Mass Properties Practitioners to volunteer as Mentors.  This is easy to do, using the online form at https://www.sawe.org/training/mentoring/ and clicking the Apply as a Mentor button.  Shortly before the Cocoa Beach Conference, the companion Apply as a Mentee button will also become active.  Mentees can then be matched with suitable Mentors, and the transfer of knowledge that is the lifeblood of the SAWE can begin.

The SAWE Mentoring Program is unique to the SAWE – no other organization has the breadth of experience or has the span of weights-related tasks as those performed by SAWE members working in the complex field of mass properties.  Our membership spans the globe and has members in every endeavor that employ mass properties personnel.  Some of those have years of experience they can share, while others need to gain the knowledge required to acquire this experience.  The SAWE Mentoring Program will meld these two forces, creating a knowledgeable workforce that benefits both the individual members and their organizations.  And although invaluable, it won’t cost a member a single cent, as this is just one of the benefits of SAWE membership.

Be On the Look Out (BOLO in law enforcement lingo) for the rollout of the SAWE Mentoring Program.  It will be complete by the opening of the 82nd International Conference on Mass Properties on May 20, 2023 in Cocoa Beach Florida.  Those who will be attending can witness this rollout as a special presentation on Monday, May 23rd, and any member can sign on as a Mentor or Mentee when the rollout commences.

Major New SAWE Member Benefit Coming

Let’s say you are a mass properties engineer faced with solving a problem you have not seen before.  Chances are that this has been something that someone else has already seen.  Wouldn’t it be splendid if you could consult with a person with experience, who could support you in finding a solution to your problem?

Or let’s turn this around.  An engineer has a problem.  You’ve seen and handled this problem in the past.  You could help the other engineer – IF you were aware that they could use your help.

How do these two hypothetical engineers discover each other – the one with the problem and the one with solutions?  It is highly unlikely that pure chance will put the two together.  In fact, they might not know each other.

Enter The SAWE Mentoring Program.  This program, currently under development, will act to engage Mentors (those with knowledge) with Mentees (those who desire to obtain knowledge).  For this to work, the SAWE will be soliciting Mentors who are willing and able to aid in transferring knowledge to Mentees, via a Mentor/Mentee matching process that will bring those seeking solutions in contact with those who know solutions.  We will open a portal for mentees to describe their problem and solicit help.  The SAWE will then endeavor to match suitable Mentor/Mentee pairs.

The SAWE has set a goal of rolling the program out and be up and running by the opening of the Cocoa Beach Conference in May 2023.

More information will be forthcoming as the program development matures.

SAWE Virtual Forum 9 – Mass Properties Uncertainty Analysis

The SAWE is proud to present our 9th Virtual Forum, a panel and audience participation venue to inform and debate important issues in mass properties engineering.  This forum’s topic is Mass Properties Uncertainty Analysis, and our panelists are John Nakai from The Aerospace Corporation and Robert Zimmerman, Technical Director of the SAWE.  The Forum will be via Google Meet and will run for an hour and a half commencing on Friday, January 27th at 12:00 EST (11:00 CST, 10:00 MST, 9:00 PST, 14:00 BRT, 15:00 GMT, 16:00 CET).

The forum will start with differentiating mass growth from mass properties uncertainties, then it will delineate sources of mass properties uncertainties.  The “meat” of the forum will concentrate on three inter-related uncertainty questions asked by working mass properties engineers:  How do you determine uncertainty ranges?  How do you characterize uncertainty?  And how do you compute uncertainties?  Next, because of various constraints, some uncertainties may be determined in a coordinate system that is not the project’s preferred coordinates, so a brief discussion with references to SAWE papers will point to how to treat rotated uncertainties.  The formal presentation will conclude by summarizing uncertainty modeling techniques.

Questions may be raised during the presentation and following the presentation the floor will be open for general discussion.

Registration will be required and will open in early January.

Why I Took the Mass Properties Certification Exam

Certified.  I am a Certified Mass Properties Engineer.  I have taken the test and I passed.

Why?  After all, I am retired, nearly a septuagenarian, unlikely to be employed again, particularly as a mass properties engineer.  Right now, you can count the number of Certified Mass Properties Engineers on the fingers of one hand.  We few are the vanguard, the first of many to come.  We set the example, and that example will bring an understanding by both those certified and those who desire informed mass properties engineers that there is a basic knowledge required to be an effective mass properties engineer.

My professional journey began in the 1970’s, a time of stagflation, disco and polyester, and general malaise.  I had a technical degree (Physics) and a desire to be in aerospace.  I interviewed at several companies in Wichita, got multiple offers, and chose a company that offered subsidized flight training, as I always wanted to fly.  I started in the Weight Control group, and began calculating weight, CG, and MOI of parts, which then got integrated into a database that modeled a new aircraft.  Mathematically, the work was interesting.  As I showed ability, I was given more complicated tasks, including running plots of CG vs fuel burn, landing gear kinematics, and control surface mass properties.  I was also taking flying lessons.

My instructor, Jim, was a big man, pushing 300 pounds.  When he sat in the plane, he took all of his seat and part of mine.  Calculations showed that with full fuel, the aircraft we flew was overweight.  Nevertheless, up we went on flight after flight.  Then came the big day, my first solo, three times around the pattern, three take-offs, three landings.  Jim got out, I taxied to the end of the runway, pushed the throttle in, and I was suddenly in control of something unfamiliar.  Acceleration was, well – not brisk, but peppier than I was used to.  Climbing out, I saw climb rates much higher than I’d seen in all the times I’d flown this plane, reaching pattern altitude before reaching downwind.  And the descent to landing was shallower, to the point that I landed much farther down the runway than I had intended.  The next two circuits were similar, except I anticipated the descent rate better.

It was a revelation – what I was doing for my job was not some mathematical exercise – there were real-world consequences tied to mass properties.  I began paying attention to physical objects, subconsciously calibrating the mass properties of my world.  Length times width times height times density equals weight.  Where’s the CG of that car, vertically and front to back?  What does it weigh?  Conversely, I started the long process of seeing how a design evolves, how the different pieces fit together and what drives design decisions.  For example, the horizontal tail of an aircraft in level flight provides a downforce sufficient to equal the moment that the CG has driving the nose down about the center of lift.  How much structure is required so that this downforce tilts the aircraft without bending it?  That, plus margins drive the weight of that structure.  Over time, that became wondering how to minimize the weight without compromising some other aspect.

I changed companies and went to work in the space world – rockets and spacecraft.  Now there was another aspect added – POI.  The three-dimensional placement of individual components became important.  I learned to visualize the consequences of component placement on axis misalignment.  My second spinning spacecraft drove me to improve on the process I’d been taught.  That process utilized a program that required multiple computer runs to adjust positions, check the resulting POI’s, calculate the misalignments which then could be compared to the requirement.  I created a spreadsheet that combined all the calculations and would instantly give me the result from any change.  This had two unexpected consequences.  One, since it was fairly early in the proposal phase, I was free to experiment with component placement.  My first run of the spreadsheet, with the parts where the designers had placed them was well outside the pointing requirement.  I visualized what I was seeing spinning about and realized that if I moved a couple of components that the majority of the misalignment would go away.  I presented this concept to the team, and the chief scientist came up to me and said this solved one of his most perplexing problems.  With this as the new baseline, then it became a matter of small adjustments of other components to meet the pointing requirement.  Then came the second surprise – when we turned the proposal in to the customer, the customer was so impressed with my automated solution they requested it be given to them.

I continued my career.  People I’d worked with on one program I ran across on other programs.  I had one program director tell me “The aerospace community is small.  You can move around and meet almost everyone, or you can stay at one company and they’ll come by and meet you.”  I stayed at one company, and quite a few of those I’d worked with became leads, managers, people in high places.  And they knew me and asked for me when there were tough mass properties problems.  And this was because I had the knowledge and experience, and the people in charge knew that I had the knowledge and experience.

Today, things are different in one key aspect – there is much more turmoil in the workplace.  Fewer and fewer mass properties engineers spend their career at one company.  Those that have done so are nearing retirement or have retired.  Today’s mass properties engineer probably don’t have the luxury of long association with people in high places that have first-hand knowledge of a mass properties engineer’s experience.  Nor do they have a way to determine if their engineers actually have the knowledge to do their job.

That is until now.  The SAWE has instituted a Certified Mass Properties Engineer program.  The first few adventurous engineers have successfully passed the certification exam.  The exam itself tests an applicant’s knowledge and understanding of mass properties.  Now we have a means to objectively show management and customers that an engineer has the required knowledge to perform in a mass properties role.  This should bring confidence to customers, employers, and employees alike, that engineers know what they are doing.

Right now there is no requirement that a mass properties engineer be certified, no requirement from a customer that a company’s engineering staff include certified engineers.  But that could and should change as more engineers get certified, and the supervisors, employers and customers gain confidence in knowing that there is a standard to which their engineers strive to meet.

Circling back to the beginning – why should anyone get certified?  Two reasons immediately spring to mind, depending on where you are in your career.  If you are new or relatively new, certification will bolster your confidence and bolster your employers’ confidence in you.  And that bodes well for you career.  If you are an experienced engineer, certification also bolsters your confidence and your employer’s confidence, but it also places you on the path to mentorship.  Mentoring others not only helps the mentee, but also boosts the mentor both mentally and within the eyes of your employer.  And for someone like me, past the employment stage, it is that certification institutionalizes the mentoring relationships that I may have.

The Fallacy of Scaling, or Why You Need Highly Knowledgeable Experts

Picture this scenario – an internal or external customer contacts a team, possibly through a Request for Proposal (RFP) or as an exercise. The customer knows that your team makes a certain product, and the customer desires to have a similar product. However, the original product is either too big or too small for the desired application. What generally happens?

A small team of engineers, along with a support team of management, financial, and business experts, convenes to define a solution that meets the customer’s desires. Since a similar product already exists, that product becomes a starting point for engineering, cost, and schedule studies. Usually, the preferred outcome is a product like the existing one but with more – more range, more seats, or more payload capacity. Occasionally the preference is for less – less range, less payload, or more likely, smaller external dimensions. The first course of action the team comes to is to take the current product and scale it to fit the new product’s specifications.

The problem then becomes how to do the scaling in a credible manner. I first realized this phenomenon when I was 6 years old, sitting in the rear seat of a four-passenger Piper Comanche. We had stopped overnight in Little Rock, Arkansas, and were sitting on the ramp with the engine idling when a North American P51D Mustang went by on a taxiway. I stared at the Mustang, my mind boggled by its sheer size. Up until that time, I had seen pictures of the legendary World War II fighter, and even had a model of one. But in my six-year old mind, I had made a basic scaling error – I took what I knew, the size of a four place single engine aircraft, and had scaled down that size for my internal picture of how big a Mustang ought to be, for it only had one seat, not four. And so, looking out the window from my vantage of a four place aircraft, and watching this behemoth roll by, caused a definite case of cognitive dissonance.

I had let one parameter guide my understanding of how big a Mustang is. A more thorough investigation would have uncovered some more pertinent parameters, such as engine horsepower (Mustang: 1490, Comanche: 250, or about 6 times the power), cruise speed (435 mph vs 180), and max gross weight (12,100 pounds vs 2900). Then I might have realized my mistake and understood that the Mustang was 50% longer and twice as tall as the Comanche, even with a similar wingspan.

Therein lies the fallacy of scaling – the scaling parameters must be categorized and prioritized, and for that you need knowledgeable experts. These are people who understand the interactions of different parameters, which ones to deprecate, and the ones that should dominate. And most importantly, what parameters really matter. If you are taking a four place aircraft and turning it into a six-place aircraft, there are lots of changes besides adding two seats. Most likely the fuselage length grows, and this upsets the balance of where the center of lift is for multiple reasons. Not only are you adding aluminum (or additional composites), but cable lengths (both electrical and mechanical) change. The outer mold line of the fuselage necessarily changes, the question becomes whether a “plug” is installed or the whole fuselage changes. These decisions have aerodynamic consequences. Think of the difference between the Beechcraft Debonair straight-tail Bonanza (four seats) and Bonanza 36 series (six seats) vs the Grumman American AA1 (two seats) and AA5 series aircraft (four seats). Both initial aircraft added two seats. The Bonanza took the route of blending the fuselage across the new length whereas the AA1 vs AA5 has a constant-width plug. Consequently, the AA5 has control problems in certain flight regimes, where the slab sides result in aerodynamic blanking of one or more tail surfaces. The Beechcraft solution was undoubtedly more expensive, but the 36 series of Bonanzas has endured in the marketplace whereas the AA series is a footnote.

So, what can you as a mass properties engineer do when faced with this very familiar scenario? We are in an irreplaceable position on any program because mass properties engineers have visibility across the breadth of a program. Use that to your advantage. Put on your systems engineering hat and look at how the various parts of your total system come together and how they interact. This is where mass properties engineers shine. We are among the few who have insight into every aspect of the product from where components are placed to how these components operate. And, because mass properties engineers have this insight, we are able to influence design and design changes, including functional and aesthetic aspects of a proposed design. Unlike most other engineering disciplines, we are not “pigeon-holed” into affecting one of a design’s parameters. We can interplay multiple factors and guide the program’s management towards arriving at a better solution than one by multiple engineers, each looking only at a subset of the available options. This is the true Unique Selling Point of Mass Properties Engineering, one that has immense value to a company employing mass properties engineers and it is one of the major reasons engineers choose to stay in mass properties.

Finally, what is the SAWE’s role in enabling an individual mass properties engineer to perform this powerful position? Look no further than the SAWE’s Mission Statement: The Society of Allied Weight Engineers is an international, professional, nonprofit organization dedicated to the promotion, practice, and innovation of the field of mass properties engineering. The SAWE executes its mission via a variety of initiatives encompassing peer reviewed papers, conferences, industry leading training, mentoring by experienced mass properties engineers, and establishing industry specific Standards and Practices. The SAWE has enabled countless mass properties engineers to better serve their companies through all the above methods of knowledge transfer, in the process creating the next generation of mass properties experts. Tying this all together, the engineers who become tomorrow’s experts will lead the innovations that power tomorrow’s products.

Fatigue Life vs Weight Virtual Forum Coming November 20th

Designing for the lightest weight conflicts with the reality that our products have to be usable over their lifetime.  Flexure, friction, rolling resistance, and impact resistance all need to be considered before a product is released for production.  Combating these forces and movements often requires additional or larger structure to ensure a product’s survival out in “the world”.  How do we, as mass properties engineers, accurately predict structural and dynamic systems weight based on system life requirements?

Answering this question is the subject of the second SAWE Virtual Forum.  The Society of Allied Weight Engineers is holding a one-hour Virtual Forum on Fatigue Life vs Weight on Friday, November 20th at 8 AM PST (11 AM EST, 4PM CEST) to discuss this looming problem. Join us and let the SAWE know your experiences and opinions on how best to account for component life requirements in the weight of structural and dynamic components.

Join Forum Leader Josh Elmore of the Army’s Combat Capabilities Development Command, Aviation and Missile Center, and the SAWE Leadership in this 2020-2021 SAWE Virtual Forum via Zoom (link below) and let your voice be heard.  Be involved in solving a problematic aspect of mass properties engineering that impacts not only our ability to control weight, but our relationships with our management and customers.

Zoom Instructions

To join the meeting, first you must register using the link below.


After registering, you will receive an email from Bill Boze (SAWE Executive Director) with the subject “Tech Forum – Fatigue Life vs Weight Confirmation”. Save this email, as it has the information required to actually join the meeting. Please note that to join the meeting, you MUST use the Zoom desktop client or mobile app. You will not be able to join using the web client.

Your organization needs competent mass properties engineers

According to a survey conducted by the Society of Allied Weight Engineers in 2018, organizations that design, build and/or operate aeronautical, marine, offshore or land vehicles need to promote the value of mass properties engineers within their organization to ensure vehicles can operate to their intended performance and safety parameters.  Simultaneously, organizations must focus on replacing and transferring the knowledge and experience of mass properties engineers who will be leaving in large numbers in the next 5 to 10 years.

The aforementioned is the leading paragraph to a letter being distributed to the leaders in government and industry to promote the value of mass properties engineering, while also inviting them to learn more about SAWE and how SAWE can address the collective needs of those organizations who need competent mass properties engineers.  The attached letter and accompanying enclosure have been distributed to the leadership of over 200 addressees  worldwide.  We want to increase the reach of this letter by asking you to share it with your fellow mass properties engineers and elevate this letter up your management chain to garner support for increased organizational awareness and involvement.  We also encourage you to utilize this letter to secure financial support for attending the next SAWE International Conference in May in Norfolk, Virginia.


Bill Boze

President, Society of Allied Weight Engineers