Chemistry vs Natural Sciences (for an explosives related career)

[CompletelyCrakers]

I’ll provide the context upfront so I don’t have to keep drip feeding and might make it easier for people.

DS loves chemistry. He’s always being going down the chemistry route and he has been obsessed with fireworks and explosives since he was about 12. He originally wanted to be a pyrotechnician until he learned more about explosives as part of his extensive research into explosives chemistry.

His ultimate aim is to work in in something like explosives chemistry, ballistics, munitions engineering, or, if that fails, he still wants to be a pyrotechnician.

Since he was in early secondary he was set on going to uni to study chemistry.
The last year or so, since he’s done a bit of looking and research into potential explosives chemistry jobs he’s discovered some of the potential pathways include more than just chemistry.

He’s been having a good look at uni courses, chemical engineering was considered but has been dismissed. Theres an ordinance and explosives engineering degree at UWTSD, which is at the back of his mind, but he still thinks he wants to do something more chemistry related, at least just for the fun of studying it for a few years.

However, he has started thinking natural sciences might be a good choice because that includes physics and materials sciences as well as chemistry which he thinks might be a better background for what he wants to do than straight chemistry.

Current Y12.
A levels: Chemistry, physics, maths and further maths + EPQ (explosives related). Predicted A-A*s.

GCSEs: 9 + higher project all grades 7-9.

What do you think?
Chemistry or Natural sciences?
Pros and cons?

Thank you :)

Which part of the industry is he interested in? Pyrotechnics? Munitions? Rocket motors?

Munitions production can involve chemists, process engineers, electronics and controls engineers, materials engineers, systems engineers, nuclear physicists etc.

BAe Glascoed offer an apprenticeship for the Ordnance, Munitions and Explosives degree, and Cranfield offer a specialist EO engineering MSc at Shrivenham (this is about £37k fees for the 1 year course, though it can be done as a 3 yr apprenticeship).

I used to work for BAe tangentially in this area, but the company has contracted massively in the UK over the last 20 years, and there are few BAe research / manufacturing sites remaining here. There were certainly a lot of production chemists around when I worked there, and engineers of various flavours, depending on the specialty of each site.

The QinetiQ website might be worth a look, as it is the DERA research arm that was spun out of the MOD.

Be aware that anything defence related will require security vetting, and many work sites can be fairly inaccessible by public transport.

You also could try contacting the Institute of Explosives Engineers for advice?

https://iexpe.org/

Theres an ordinance and explosives engineering degree at UWTSD, which is at the back of his mind, but he still thinks he wants to do something more chemistry related, at least just for the fun of studying it for a few years.

Could he do joint honours?

Just as an aside, online content... There's a young man, Nile Something, does chemistry videos. Yours could make some money!

That OME degree has a year in industry, which might be interesting and useful for employment, it’s a super niche course though.

Dd2 is taking natural sciences and t here are of course many combinations of subject streams.I will say NatSci is a very big workload.In practice it is the bulk of 2 degrees and at some universities it requires higher entry grades than any of the single sciences.At Bath for example A*AA but with preference for 4 subjects.

Has he considered the ethics around it?

Chemistry should have plenty of maths in, but if he can get something with a decent amount of physics/ engineering it could also open up demolition and mine engineering. Plenty of systems include explosives besides ordnance. I think car air bags have a small charge don't they.

I don’t think he necessarily cares (or maybe knows?) at this point what area of the industry. He just has this massive interest in explosives, how they work and the chemistry behind them. Always has done and that’s what’s driving him.

He knows there’s actually quite a lot out there which uses explosives (has also looked at forensic explosives, knows explosives are used in other industries such as mining and construction) so there are a lot of potential pathways beyond just munitions and defence. The thinking behind chemistry or natural sciences is that it keeps more options open. The OME takes him down that path and keeps him there and I think he’s worried that is narrowing potential career pathways too early. He might have a big interest but there’s a slight unsureness there.

He’s found the MSc at Shivernham, and the apprenticeship that goes alongside it. He’s mentioned this might be something he would like to do after doing something more general but related (hence the chemistry vs natural sciences).

@SabrinaThwaite Thank you for the link to the institute and the other companies names. He will have hours of fun looking through those websites. I’ll get him to have a look at the OME apprenticeship at Glascoed and see what he thinks of it. Good idea about contacting the institute as well, I’ll get him to think about doing that. As someone who has worked tangentially in this industry, would you have an opinion on whether straight chemistry or natural sciences would provide the better grounding?

@BunniesRUs I don’t think he has, but a very good point which I shall mention to him. Sounds like something he should definitely have a think about and look at all the perspectives on it.

@MrsTerryPratchett Good idea in principle, bit I can just imagine coming home to a blown up kitchen with him saying “Sorry! I was just mixing the household chemicals together to show people on YouTube something about explosives” 😂

@ilovebreadsauce @StamppotAndGravy I think you’re both making the case for natural sciences maybe being the better one for what he would like to do because that would allow him to explore physics, materials and other related subjects whilst still maintaining the chemistry? I don’t think the workload would both him too much, he’s always been reading about chemistry related and explosives related things in his own time so I think he would manage. I personally cannot see a disadvantage of one or the other, but I am not at 17 year old who wants to go down that pathway.

It was a fair few years ago that I worked in the industry, but I was lucky enough to see lots of different aspects of production. From memory, chemical explosives production methods were pretty well established, and a lot of the research was into the engineering and technology side of things.

Explosives are used in a wide range of applications - car air bags, seat belt pretensioners, ejector seats, rocket motors, mining & quarrying, construction etc.

Rocket motors could be an interesting area, given the current growth in space exploration? There’s a small hub at Westcott Venture Park.

Given his academic trajectory, I think the Nat Sci type of course would stretch him more and give him a wider range of career opportunities - my concern about the OME course is that it’s likely to be narrow and niche (although at the end of the day it’s a BEng degree, which is always a good thing).

If he’s interested in the history of explosives production I can recommend this book (see photo). If you’re anywhere near Wetherby then Thorp Arch is an interesting place as it was a WWII filling factory and some of the original structures are still there (Google maps shows them quite well). Also the Royal Gunpowder Mills at Waltham Abbey is a good trip.

Hi, OP -

Academic here, STEM subject. Your DS sounds delightful. Young people with a true, burning intellectual interest are one of the things that make the teaching side of the work worthwhile.

You have a lot of good advice here, but I am going to give the other side as something to think about. DS has loved, and lived, Chemistry forever. He is now thinking about Natural Sciences for pragmatic reasons and there is nothing wrong with that. In fact it is very intelligent.

But students tend to do best when they are happy, and if DS puts Chemistry aside he may be sad about it. I also think his enthusiasm for the subject sounds infectious and, although you know better than me if he would be well advised to rein it in a bit (not that I am suggesting this) I think it could make him popular with students and staff alike. Finally, he’s obviously very bright.

Bright, motivated students who take advantage of the opportunities presented to them to prepare for their careers tend to do very well. The choice of Chem vs NS is IMO secondary, presuming the degree programme is a sound one. However this is a rare instance where, depending on guidance from the professional societies, I think a standalone MSc in the area of Explosives seems to me more useful than an integrated Master’s.

Finally, at some unis, even excellent ones, Chem may give lower offers than NS.

Best wishes to your DS. I think he should follow his heart on this.

OTOH a lot of a chemistry degree is about not blowing things up. (and chemical engineering certainly is!)

It may depend on what choice of modules there is in various chemistry vs natural sciences degrees how much of each chimes with his particular ambitions. Relevant physics and materials science modules might possibly fit his interest better than a lot of a traditional rounded chemistry degree.... tbh I can't think of that much in mine (over 4 decades ago) which had anything whatever to do with pyrotechnics or explosives.

I think you’ve had a lot of very good advice but when I’ve been reading your posts it sounds like he wants to go to university for the fun of it and enjoyment of studying with a general area of career in mind which he will ‘get to’ at some point.

If that is the case he needs to dig into the modules and figure out whether the module/module combinations are what he would enjoy doing.

Don’t worry about the degree title or prestigious university name.

If he wants fun and enjoyment then choose on those grounds. There’s too much stress in life for YP today and if your DS has something he is really interested in, I would encourage him to ‘just do it!’ while he is young and has no big life pressures. A bit of selfishness is required and this is the time in life to grab it with both hands and go for it. It’s very unlikely there will be any other time in life where this can happen so embrace the opportunity.

Also think even more outside of the box. Are there any other degrees he might be interested in which would offer the fun and enjoyment but are relevant to future career plans?

I don’t think he can go wrong if he has an aim and chooses modules that he will enjoy. So as for the chemistry vs Nat sci debate. Don’t worry about it. Like I say, dig deep and choose based on modules rather than degree name. Especially as there is a masters that will give him what he needs to have the career he will like which he can do after he has done something for himself.

Good luck!

I did Nat Sci (at Bath) a long time ago. It was great, but hard going - you need to keep up with the Chemists/physicists etc while not going toall the related lectures.
I have spent a lot of time telling people I'm not a biologist.
In hindsight, I did it because I didn't want to choose between physics and chemistry. I wish I'd picked one (or better yet Chemical Engineering).
I'd look for a chemistry course at a university that has a strength in explosives, and take it from there.

@ErrolTheDragon has made some good points, OP, both for Nat Sci and , IMO, for re-investigating Chem Eng. That’s so obviously to do with explosives that I wonder why DS wrote it off? OTOH it may point to a deeper love for Chemistry than he has been able to articulate, and the bottom line is that such a bright, passionate fellow will do well to follow his instincts

Chem Eng opens up a wide range of industrial careers, especially in process engineering, but being maths heavy you have to love maths.

I’m not sure I’d describe it as “so obviously to do with explosives” any more than a straight chemistry degree would be though. Straight chemistry could cover the principles of, say, creating TNT whereas Chem Eng could cover the manufacturing process.

Did you feel your degree was too broad.DD is doing natsci mastersc and this is something that has worried me.

I would say chemistry as it opens more doors, he might change his mind in the future or swap interests. Doing your university course opens up different areas. With chemistry drug discovery, FMCG companies can come into play too.

Argh wrote long reply then lost it. In summary - I did Cambridge natsci and can picture it fitting your son v well. Also you start broad but you then specialise so you aren’t missing out, and all scientists do natsci not just some. Great to broaden and strengthen and also to try things you didn’t try at a level. Then focus on a masters afterwards- no undergrad chem or natsci course is going to particularly focus on explosives and id think natsci is just as likely to cover as chemistry is.

Or look at those v focussed and specialised undergrads that people have mentioned up thread.

I did it at Cambridge and we did 3 sciences and maths in first year, then two sciences in 2nd year (but one weighted more heavily) and third and 4th year we focussed on just one. So no it wasn’t too broad - it opened up avenues we hadn’t considered but still allowed us to specialise. I know quite a few people myself included who ended up doing a science they’d not come across at a level.

Like @Talipesmum , my DDs are both NatSci students/graduates. DD1 always wanted to study Chemistry, but wasn't certain enough to opt for straight Chem at Oxford, so studied NatSci at Cambridge. In her 2nd year, Materials Science really grabbed her and she ended up specialising in that, and is now in her 3rd year of a PhD in it. Her schoolfriend read Chemistry at Oxford and by the end of the 4 undergrad/Masters years, absolutely loathed everything about it. DD felt that having other subjects on the go made for a more interesting experience, and NatSci graduates are apparently sought after. NatSci is offered by quite a lot of different places now so it is worth looking into the pathways on offer.