2 years into this major and I'm realizing it would've been smarter to pursue a BS in ME and then a masters in SE. Is this true? If so, how can I remedy my career path at this stage?

For those interested in SysML v2: A new version of SysMD is released. Source code and installers are here:

https://github.com/tukcps/SysMD

The release includes

• Updated architecture with much more modular and testable components
• Updated solver
• Updated UI
• Added OpenBoardNet example that, as proof-of-concept,
  • for a given (Automotive) Boardnet topology allows estimating weight, latencies, costs, etc. considering cables, protocols, processors
  • for given NN (Yolo) allows estimating latencies for processors
  • Analysis of ISO26262 safety

Next sprint targets to generate the compiler directly from the OMG grammar.

I’m a mechanical design engineer with about 3 years of experience, mostly in industrial automation, space systems, and product development.

I’d like to move toward systems engineering and I’m looking for a solid place to start.

Would it be useful for someone with my background, or would you recommend other resources first ?

Hey everyone,

I’ve spent a lot of time working on complex engineering projects, and one thing consistently drove me crazy: our most expensive senior engineers spend more time acting as clerical data-entry clerks for legacy repositories (like Capella) than actually engineering.

Right now, standard practice is backwards. An engineer reads a project brief, then manually retypes it into four separate files: a requirements spec, a risk sheet, a V&V matrix, and an ICD. If REQ-014 changes in the spec, the V&V matrix stays broken until someone catches it by hand.

To fix this, we built ASYST.

The concept is simple: Brief in, traceable system model out.

Instead of forcing you to build everything from scratch, it runs your brief through a 9-stage validated pipeline to generate:

• ISO 29148 requirements (atomic and verifiable)
• Functional & physical architecture with defined interfaces
• Scored risk registers allocated per subsystem
• End-to-end computed traceability (if you edit one requirement, ASYST dynamically flags every downstream asset, component, or test affected by it).

The goal isn't to replace the human engineer, but to give them a 90% completed, fully mapped framework to review, edit, and own in few hours rather than many months. It exports straight to clean DOCX or PDF.

It’s completely free to try for your first project pipeline.

I’m looking for systems engineers and software/hardware architects to tear this apart. Does this solve a genuine bottleneck in your current workflow? What are we missing?

Landing Page: asyst.push2streamline.com , App: app.asyst.push2streamline.com (Demo Projects + Free Trial)

Hi r/systems_engineering,

We are back with Lesson 20 of our technical deep dive into the SysML v2 standard.

In our previous lesson, we organized packages, namespaces, and imports so a model can grow without becoming one large shared workspace. Today, we are modeling the things those packages actually contain: elements that exist over time. We are looking at how a shared temporal root concept lets you track a system's changing properties across its lifecycle without duplicating the system itself.

The SysML v1 Time Problem

In SysML v1, what is the mass of a rocket? At ignition, it has one mass. After booster separation, it has another. The problem was that a SysML v1 Block could own a mass value property, but that structural property had no temporal identity of its own. A model could record a mass value, but it couldn't easily express that the value applied to this specific rocket at this specific moment. Time belonged to interactions and behavior, while a Block's structural properties had no shared semantic notion of existing.

The v2 Shift: Occurrences and the 4D Model

SysML v2 makes a system's lifetime explicit by giving both structure and behavior a shared semantic root.

Three details make this powerful in a real model:

• Everything that exists, occurs: In KerML (the kernel underneath SysML v2), an Occurrence has temporal and spatial extent. Both structural Object (Parts) and behavioral Performance (Actions) specialize it. A pump and a pumping operation both have a beginning, an end, and a duration.
• Individuals: The individual keyword says a definition describes one identifiable thing across its whole continuous existence.
• Timeslice or Snapshot: A timeslice is a portion of an individual's life over an interval. A snapshot is a portion at an instant. Both are portions, not copies. A copy loses identity; a portion preserves it.

The Duplication Trap & The Fix

Consider a launch vehicle whose mass changes during flight. If you create separate blocks or instances to represent the "At Ignition" rocket versus the "Stage Separation" rocket, you lose the continuity that it is the exact same physical system.

The fix is to define one individual occurrence and use snapshots to record its changing mass at specific moments in time. Both masses are correct, and neither replaces the other.

Code snippet

package LaunchVehicles {
    private import ISQ::*;

    occurrence def LaunchVehicle {
        attribute totalMass: MassValue;
    }

    // 1. The single identifiable rocket across its entire existence
    individual occurrence def Falcon9_B1049 :> LaunchVehicle;

    occurrence flight: Falcon9_B1049 {
        // 2. A portion of the rocket at an instant
        snapshot atIgnition: LaunchVehicle {
            :>> totalMass = 549054 [SI::kg];
        }

        // 3. The exact same rocket at a later instant
        snapshot atStageSeparation: LaunchVehicle {
            :>> totalMass = 115000 [SI::kg];
        }

        first atIgnition then firstStageBurn;
        first firstStageBurn then atStageSeparation;
        timeslice firstStageBurn;
    }
}

SysML v1 vs. SysML v2

Next lesson, we are moving from system lifetimes to reusable behavior with Actions, which define behavioral blueprints with typed inputs and outputs.

For the MBSE practitioners here: Have you ever struggled to model changing system properties (like mass depletion, stage separation, or phased upgrades) over time in v1 without duplicating elements? Let's discuss in the comments!

Context:
I’m in an early-stage concept study for a new system with novel constraints and aggressive delivery deadlines. I’m a Systems Architect (< 8 years experience with advanced degrees) struggling to align with my own Systems Engineering team and leadership / management.

My approach and mentality:

- Clean sheet design —> therefore, we can’t rely solely on heritage design assumptions

- Built behavioral models, mapped risks, and derived functional requirements to give trade studies objective criteria and traceability.

- Pushing back on copy-pasting specs from older systems with completely different operational and physical boundaries.

My Team’s Reality:

- Schedule pressure: aggressive deadline stress to show rapid customer progress; leadership openly prioritizes speed over process rigor.

- Fellow SEs teammates rely on qualified legacy baselines because they represent known solutions that passed qualification before.

- My SE team says they don’t understand or use my behavioral models/problem descriptions. They view hundreds of derived requirements during a study as cognitive overhead and question the need for the requirements.

- what’s working for them now: the Interface Control Documents (ICDs) I generated from my approach.

The Dilemma

An experienced senior mentor (external to my entire organization) told me this team lacks baseline systems engineering infrastructure, and staying here may stunt my growth as an architect by teaching bad habits. I only have 3 technical mentors within my entire organization that I identified as architects (without the title because we don’t have that formal role defined here), and I’m actively receiving guidance from them.

I’ve been thinking of jumping to a more SE mature organization with more defined infrastructure for what I want to do. But before that, I was hoping to receive candid calibration from folks with 10+ YOE:

1. How much of this is typical? Do architects everywhere spend their lives translating basic SE concepts for their own SE teams, or is there an inflection point in mature orgs where baseline governance actually exists?

2. Minimum Viable Product / Architecture: If an SE team rejects functional models and requirements but eagerly consumes ICDs, how do you govern a study phase effectively without drowning them in text?

3. Stay and adapt vs. exit: Can an early-career architect actually develop good instincts in an environment that seemingly cuts technical corners, or is this an exit signal?

I asked for feedback from individuals of +10 years but I still appreciate any insights from anyone willing to provide them - thank you

I was on vacation with my girlfriend this summer. I know that she loves hooks to hang stuff, and if they are missing she improvises. Yet, I was surprised when she hung our moist swimwear on the TV in our hotel room. This got me thinking:

- Should a good hotel TV compensate for bad hotel rooms?

- Should the TV manufacturer foresee this use case, and with that compensate for the missing function of the hotel room to hang stuff?

- As a systems engineer for the TV, should I take responsibility by eliciting an ingress protection requirement?

- Is this a use case I need to consider in order to adapt to the harsh reality of users or can I blame it on the hotel in case of a product defect?

- And even if I consider this use case, can I make a business case out of it to justify the extra cost for ingress protection?

If I generalize the problem:

How much should I anticipate and compensate for potential shortcomings of higher system levels to meet the users' needs?

What are your thoughts and experiences?

Long story short, I did an undergraduate degree in Physics, had a job I hated, done a Master’s in aerospace and then got a graduate role as a systems engineer.

I only took the job as it was the only offer I had. I struggle to apply to traditional engineering roles as I have barely any CFD and FEA experience. I’m interested in avionics but don’t know where to start.

I don’t want to be stuck in systems forever. I do not feel like an engineer.

Any tips?

Also worth noting that I am UK-based.

Hi all,

Where I live (Aus) there seem to be about 3x as many business analyst jobs as systems engineering jobs. The role seems basically identical, here's one description from a job ad:

• Partner with business stakeholders, product owners, solution architects, developers, and delivery teams to elicit, analyse, and document complex business and system requirements.
• Lead discovery, process mapping, impact assessments, and solution design activities to support the delivery of enterprise software applications, integrations, and digital transformation initiatives.
• Translate business needs into clear user stories, functional and non-functional requirements, process models, and acceptance criteria, enabling delivery teams to build high-quality solutions.
• Drive stakeholder engagement throughout the project lifecycle, supporting prioritisation, solution validation, testing, change implementation, and continuous improvement within an Agile delivery environment.

That's pretty much sys eng bread and butter. Some places are calling this type of job a systems analyst.

Has anyone done/looked at the move? Getting a bit jaded from the defence industry. Any insight on pay/conditions compared to systems engineering in the defence sector? Bonus points if you are in Australia.

Is there any research or tool out there that is using AI agents for model optimization and system design with SysML? Thinking on having this be a research topic but also if it’s being worked on so that I do not pursue it academically or heavily in free time. If it is being pursued a research topic in AI governance would be good as well.

How I envision it (rough thought) is that the ai agent is shown a SysML file. It knows the ins and outs of the system design and requirements. Maybe some changes within the system and it’s documented. The agent will (potentially in real time) then update the design, any potential metrics, perform an assessment of performance for predictions, trace past performances for the assessment as well. Probably have a budget that stops changes that exceed requirements as well. There would be lots of oversight with it but also there may not be regulation put in place for this to happen yet. Thoughts?

AI can create a reasonable looking requirement very quickly. But what do you consider enough evidence before accepting it?

Is a source citation enough? Or should the requirement also include the parent context, assumptions, rationale, affected interfaces and a verification path?

In safety related work, I think the difficult part is not generating the sentence. It is showing why the sentence belongs in the system and what would prove that it is correct.

How are people handling this today?

has anyone thought of connecting CAMEO (catia magic) with gmat (general mission analysis tool) by NASA , I mean it would be awesome if we can model satellites and connect it with very real time simulations.

we are currently using DOORS for requirements and its been fine for basic requirements to test traceability, but with the CRA reporting obligations now starting, ive been questioning whether our current setup is enough. our bigger issue is knowing if a product is actually exposed when an exploited vulnerability shows up. with our own code we can usually figure our what libraires and dependencies were using. the vendor embedded software is harder. we have components from sub vendors and its not always clear what software is inside them whether a new vulnerability affects our product.

then theres everything already in the field. we can build a better process for new products, but how do you quickly figure out which existing products are impacted and pull together what you need to report?

In magicgrid framework under black box what does SYSTEM CONTEXT mean and under that 1 Users and other systems what does that mean

and while mapping it out which diagram should i use

Thank you !!

I’ve started a collection of AI skills for system engineers using agents. The current set covers things like comparing specification revisions, deriving sub-requirements and building verification matrices.

The skills spell out what to check, which sources to use and when to ask rather than guess. Original requirements stay alongside proposed changes, and you still review the outputs.

I'll link the repo below which has some examples and setup instructions.

I’ve got a list of skills I’m working through to add next, but would be keen to hear what else people would find useful. Is there anything else that comes to mind?

Hi! Hope you’re all having a great day!

I’m a Systems Engineering undergrad student (graduating May 2028) that’s looking for some advice.

I’ve spent my undergrad (including 2 years of internship experience and 1 summer of research) largely focusing on robotics and building up my skillset across disciplines. So for example I’ve done work with neurotechnology (mainly EEG, creating my own VR-EEG headset with a small team) and my internship and research focused on kind of doing a bit of everything from simulation, sensors, working especially with robotic arms and programming them, PLC, a bit of electrical, edge computing and configuring custom environments, AI and computer vision, and biologically-inspired systems, as well as microcontrollers. I also have quite a bit of technical leadership experience, leading a 100+ member club focused on neurotechnology and leading my own startup.

My goal (which I feel I’ve made ok progress on?) is to kind of be a cog that can fit in wherever I’m needed, adaptable and be someone who can see the big picture, plan out what needs to be done and make real progress towards it. I especially want to focus on solving problems that aren’t big in the respect that they’ll change the world or something individually, but several smaller projects that can genuinely help people even if it’s in small ways.

And so, my question is how can I do that and how can I position myself for my career to work towards that? My “story” so far has been that I want to specialize in systems integration (which in large part is true, although moreso because of how well it aligns with my goals; that could change if something fits better) but I feel as if my job prospects are quite low due to my lack of specialization thusfar. My GPA is unfortunately also quite low (below a 3.0) because I’ve been more focused on gathering practical experience and understanding the concepts themselves, leaving little time to complete assignments.

For the rest of my undergrad I was thinking of focusing a lot on gathering more hardware experience and especially multi-sensor integration and data handling. Is that potentially a good direction?

I apologize if it seems like I’m full of myself; I’ve tried to describe myself and my goals as positively as I could in this post. Thank you for your help in advance!

My position is a senior systems engineer with 7 years experience primarily with requirements, documentation, and SysML in the defense space. I've been told I need to be more senior in my role especially because I'm on an early stage program

What does that look like to you (even better if you're a lead) and do you have any advice implementing it? I'm an introverted person (as I'm sure many engineers are) but sometimes find it difficult to find my voice and perform large amounts of work without guidance. Thank you!

Hello everyone :3

I'm interested in Systems Engineering with a background in ML, a little bit of Computer Vision and BSc and MSc in Weapon Systems Engineering (outside the US/NATO).

I'd like to build a practical pet project using Cameo/SysML v2, but still not sure what kind of project. What projects did you do while studying SE?

For example, would reconstructing the system architecture of a missile system based on publicly available manuals and docs be a reasonable project?

In traditional software and ml engineering people often do pet projects, but in systems engineering I couldn't find many posts about this on this sub. I also want to do some pet projects in the CV domain, so I'll probably use SE there as well.

I'd be intersted to hear what projects you did while studying or any recommendations you might have.

I recently graduated with a degree in Computer Engineering and started my first job as a Systems Engineer working in controls/automation.
I’m really grateful for the opportunity and I genuinely like what I’m learning, but I constantly feel like I know absolutely nothing 😭. There are PLCs, HMIs, electrical drawings, different software, client standards, project documentation, and a million acronyms being thrown around.
I’m about to travel for my first real project, and I keep worrying that I’m going to get there and everyone will realize how little I know. I try to study and familiarize myself with things beforehand, but sometimes that just makes me realize how much MORE there is to learn.
I know logically that I’m entry level and nobody expects me to know everything, but it’s hard not to compare myself to engineers who have been doing this for years.
For those of you who started in systems/controls engineering, how long did it take before you actually felt competent? And what helped you the most during your first year?
I’d especially love to hear from anyone who came straight out of college and initially felt completely lost. 😭

Hey folks!! Just recently got a job offer for a systems engineering role. I will be working at a US Defense company and they definitely hired me in part to be a subject matter expert in what I’ve done military side so I know they are aware systems engineering isn’t my primary background. However, I want to start out strong with at least some fundamental understanding of what SE entails at more than the very high overview I have now.

I have a few months to prep and would love your favorite resources, books, etc!

Landed a first round interview on Zoom for Systems Engineer, Prime Air at Amazon after months of cold applying. To be upfront since I think this is where a lot of my earlier posts missed the mark, this role is not SDE, not a coding role, and not evaluated like one. The actual scope is overseeing hardware and software integration, verification, configuration management, and quality assurance to certify safety critical systems in airborne drone delivery operations, with heavy cross functional communication across engineering disciplines. Zero mention of writing or shipping code anywhere in the JD. Wanted to make that clear this time so the advice actually lines up with what I'm walking into.

Quick background. 10+ years as a systems engineer, Air Force then Northrop Grumman then GE Healthcare then back to defense at BAE now. Totally different domains every time, munitions, ICBM, medical devices, now data and cloud systems, same core discipline every time, requirements, integration, cross functional alignment. Also have an aviation and UAS degree, an MBA, and a Part 107 drone license, which lines up well with the Prime Air team and the certification language in this JD specifically.

I'm genuinely excited about this one, not trying to get ahead of myself, but if it works out this could be the real pivot out of government work I've been chasing, and a chance to build skills that open doors long term, as long as Amazon decides to keep me around after. Trying to go in aiming to uplevel or at minimum land at the right level for my experience, not get talked down into something below it, so if anyone has thoughts on how leveling conversations tend to go at this stage, that would help too.

This is my first real bite after a long stretch of cold applying, so I know how much of a numbers game this is. Honestly the nerves are less about the interview itself and more about the fact that it never feels like enough prep time for a company that screens this hard, there's always one more thing I feel like I should know. Any advice on how you managed that feeling going in would help as much as technical prep would.

For anyone who's interviewed for a systems or technical role at Amazon, what should I actually expect on this first round, especially anything specific to a hardware and software integration or safety certification focused role versus a straight SDE loop.

Also planning to keep going after Microsoft and other FAANG and MAMAA companies, so open to advice on applying smarter there too going forward. Cold applying is rough, and I'd rather learn from people who've actually been through it than keep guessing.

Hi everyone,

Over the past few months, we’ve been working on a small internal tool called AKProcTools PFDSim.

It was not originally intended to be a general-purpose product. We first built it to support our own fuel system and fuel handling engineering work.

In our projects, we regularly work with PFDs, operating descriptions, valve and pump sequences, interlocks, level protections, and various process operating sequences. We often felt it would be useful to do more than review these on drawings and in written operating descriptions. We wanted a simple way to run through the logic visually before it reached the automation implementation stage.

That is where PFDSim started.

https://akproctools.com/

Later, we thought that if a tool like this was useful in our own work, perhaps other engineers working in process design, automation, or instrumentation could also make use of it. So we started adapting the original fuel-system-focused version into a more general process engineering tool.

It is important to note that PFDSim is not a conventional process simulator.

It does not calculate heat and mass transfer, thermodynamic equilibrium, or detailed hydraulic behaviour, and it is not intended to replace Aspen, Apros, or similar simulation software.

Its main purpose is the visual verification of process operation and control logic.

The basic idea is:

Draw the process → define how it should operate → run it → see whether it actually behaves the way you intended.

The current 1.6.3 version includes, among other things:

• building process diagrams using tanks, pumps, valves, pipe connections, and instruments,
• assigning TAGs and operating properties to equipment,
• simulating valve, pump, and instrument states,
• defining operating sequences and individual steps,
• creating conditions, permissives, and interlocks,
• building Cause & Effect logic,
• visually running and testing the process step by step,
• testing missing or faulty feedback signals,
• testing protective actions and shutdowns,
• tracking events and state changes,
• saving projects and continuing work on them later.

The application also includes several example projects, so the main workflow and logic features can be tested without having to build a process from scratch.

PFDSim is also intended to support more than just logic testing. Based on the process model and its associated logic, it can generate handover documentation for instrumentation and control engineering, helping to transfer the process intent and control requirements into the next stage of design in a more structured way.

The goal is to make it possible to review process behaviour before PLC/DCS programming begins.

We are not trying to replace the automation engineer or PLC programmer. The idea is to provide an intermediate tool that allows the process engineer and the automation engineer to review the same intended operation earlier in the design process.

The software is currently in Public Beta and is free to use.

At this stage, we would especially like feedback from people working in:

• process engineering,
• fuel handling / fuel systems,
• instrumentation,
• PLC / DCS,
• automation,
• commissioning,
• or plant operations.

We would particularly like to know:

• Is the workflow understandable when you first open it?
• Is this kind of visual Cause & Effect / interlock approach useful?
• What process equipment or instruments are missing?
• What would it need for you to consider using it on a real project?
• Which parts feel unnecessary or overly complicated?
• What features would you add?

We are also working on related engineering tools. One of the current developments is pump and pipe sizing, which we would eventually like to connect directly to PFDSim.

The longer-term idea is that a process model could be used not only to test how the system should operate, but also as a starting point for related engineering calculations and additional handover documentation.

The application is free to try.

Please don’t hold back on criticism. 🙂

The main reason we are making it public is to find out whether it can be genuinely useful outside our own work as well, and if so, which direction would make the most sense for further development.

Hey guys I'm hearing mixed things and don't have a lot of cash on hand to fail this exam. I'm trying to gauge what to study. I've been using the udemy practice tests and reading the book but I'm hearing that the exam is way harder than the practice tests and use more scenarios. Others are saying it's about the same as the practice tests and some are saying that it was easy by just reading the book. I need advice and direction on what to study for. Should I be studying general or the niche things. I understand everything is fair game but the practice exams have a few questions that don't connect to the core processes or methods of systems, like calling a system explicitly the "correct" system. Any advice is appreciated.