What the work actually is

You author self-contained aerospace engineering problems and the reference answers that go with them. A task might be a wing-box sizing problem with a load case and a material allowables table, a propulsion trade between two cycle options under a thrust and TSFC requirement, a GNC stability question with a given plant and actuator lag, or a design-review scenario where a submitted configuration has a defect a reviewer should catch. The reference answer is not just the number — it is the engineering reasoning: which assumptions you made, which standard or margin policy applies, where the design would be revisited.

The second half is grading. You read model output and judge whether it is technically correct, whether it respects the standards and margins the scenario implies, and — the part labs care most about — whether it is the kind of answer that reads fluently and confidently but would not survive a real design review or a flight. Catching a plausible-sounding load path that ignores a fitting, a stability margin computed at the wrong flight condition, or a cited requirement that does not say what the model claims is the core value you add.

What the platform screens for

AfterQuery's screen is AI-led and pushes on depth. Expect to be asked what you personally sized, analyzed, or signed off on, and then to be asked a follow-up one level below your first answer — which load cases, which allowables source, which solver and why that element type, what the margin policy was. Generalist familiarity with aerospace topics tends to surface quickly under that follow-up. They also test evaluation judgment: given a model answer that is 80% right, can you say precisely which 20% is wrong and how much it matters.

  • Depth in at least one named area — aerodynamics, structures, propulsion, or GNC — matters more than breadth across all four
  • Written English is assessed on your ability to make reasoning legible, not on polish
  • Tool depth (NASTRAN, ANSYS, CFD), flight or wind tunnel test exposure, and FAA/EASA certification work are preferred and come up as probes

Logistics

Fully remote, fully async — no standing calls, no fixed hours. You pick up task batches and set your own weekly hours, with a minimum commitment around 10 hours per week. Pay is stated by the platform as $100–130/hr, disbursed weekly via Stripe; the band is as observed and typically tracks specialization depth and task complexity rather than being negotiated per person. Work is ongoing rather than a fixed-length project, so volume can vary week to week.

Export-controlled material is not the point here — scenarios are authored to be realistic without depending on proprietary or ITAR-restricted data, and you are expected to keep your own former employers' material out of what you write.