Inside an Aerospace Lab Teaching Students to Think Like Real Engineers

When aerospace engineering seniors at the University of Minnesota walked into their capstone laboratory course this fall, many expected another semester of step-by-step procedures and predictable experiments. What they got instead was a radically different model, centered on autonomy, uncertainty, and the kind of engineering problem-solving they’ll soon face beyond graduation. From start to finish, Aeromechanics Lab has been an exciting experience for group members Sofia Gerasimchuk, Peyton Kramlich, and Monica Robles.

Designed Around Autonomy 

“It hasn’t been like a traditional class or a traditional laboratory,” said Kramlich. “You have to make your own decisions on the experiment; what you expect from aerodynamic theory, what you think would be interesting to observe. That level of personal interaction with the material has been unique.”

The course is designed around three major aerospace modules: fluids, structures, and guidance, navigation, and control. Each of these important aspects of aerospace engineering is explored in detail by testing students to reach experimental goals using state-of-the-art research tools and the knowledge they’ve acquired throughout their undergraduate education. Students are expected to review past research, design their own procedures, and troubleshoot equipment failures when they occur.

For students like Gerasimchuk, Kramlich, and Robles the shift to more independent lab work was a breath of fresh air.

“In previous labs, everything was laid out: step one, do this; step two, do that,” Gerasimchuk said. “Here, you’re forced to truly understand what the experiment is about, what data you’re trying to collect and why. It’s active recall, it’s critical thinking, and it’s a lot closer to what engineers actually do.”

Importance of Teamwork

Working within loosely defined boundaries pushed students to debate experimental parameters, justify their decisions, and take ownership of outcomes. The process not only reinforced theory but strengthened teamwork.

“You never know who you’ll be paired with, so you have to put a lot of trust in your teammates,” Robles noted. “But it came easier than I expected. We held each other accountable, and that made the experience even better.”

Challenges and Successes

The course’s open-ended structure brought challenges too. Each group has only one three-hour lab session every other week to design, run, and interpret experiments, while still preparing deliverables from the previous module.

“Time management has been difficult because the class moves so fast,” Kramlich recalled. “You walk in, and you have three hours to agree on your parameters, run the experiment, troubleshoot issues, and start your analysis.”

Issues range from hot-wire probes jamming and wind tunnels drifting out of calibration to drone trajectories misbehaving and code breaking at critical moments.

“That stress can impact your ability to think clearly,” Robles said. “But it’s also what people deal with in industry: deadlines, equipment failures, unexpected problems. So in a strange way, we’re glad we’ve had to deal with it.”

Despite the pressure, students repeatedly described their surprise at how capable they felt. When something broke, they fixed it. When an experiment didn’t produce clean data, they found a way to interpret it.
 

“Every lab had issues, but it was always something we could figure out,” Kramlich said. “It’s been a real confidence boost. In other labs, if something goes wrong, it feels like you didn’t understand the coursework. In this lab, it’s about improving your problem-solving skills and when you succeed, it feels like proof you’re becoming a real engineer.”

Students also discovered that operating professional-grade equipment, from wind tunnels to drones, was more intuitive than expected. “It gave us perspective on how accessible this work really is at this stage in our studies,” Gerasimchuk said.

Favorite Moments

There was no single favorite among the group, but many memorable highlights.

Designing control responses and watching drones execute them in real time felt exhilarating and deeply educational. Additionally, mapping an airfoil’s wake, quantifying flow behavior, and working hands-on with fluid dynamics equipment made the aerodynamics module a standout for the students.

The group also appreciated the breadth of the course, covering the three major aerospace areas, each with two labs. This left enough time to learn, apply, and reflect before moving on.

Moreover, this class required a level of engagement with professors unlike most courses. Whether presenting findings to Professor Melissa Green or troubleshooting code with Professor Ryan Caverly during drone labs, the mentorship was direct, personal, and impactful.

Looking Toward the Future

Besides sharpening students' skills, the course also influenced their aspirations.

Kramlich plans to enter the aerospace industry, particularly in hubs like Los Angeles and San Diego. Robles intends to pursue graduate studies to deepen her expertise, while Gerasimchuk is applying directly to PhD programs focused on solid mechanics and fracture research.

One component left a particularly strong impression: the module on Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC). These lectures and drone labs offered rare and invaluable exposure.

“It’s something I bring up in interviews,” Kramlich said. “Not all universities provide this experience.”

Regardless of the path they decide to take, the group is confident they will succeed now that they have the tools from courses like Aeromechanics Lab as they come to the end of their undergraduate education in the Department of Aerospace Engineering and Mechanics.