Gravity's Rainbow

The aerospace century in Southern California is about to end, writes a guest commentator on LA Observed. Northrop Grumman plans to move to Washington DC, which will be the last pullout of a major aerospace concern from greater LA. One reason is that land is no longer cheap; it also makes more sense these days for aerospace firms to be closer to politicians than airfields. The news chills me a little. I grew up in that industry, never felt drawn to it, but still prefer to think of it as part of the old bedrock.

Aerospace technologies affected local activities from the movie business to hot-rod cars and surfing. Aerospace shifted the demographic balance between white-collar engineering jobs and blue-collar manufacturing, and hence L.A.’s socioeconomic makeup. It reflected the local labor pool through the presence of Latinos and Asians and through what Ernie Pyle called the “Aviation Okies” who gave Los Angeles a Dust-Bowl inflection.

That’s right. But I suppose LA hasn’t been that LA for a number of years.

     posted 8 January 2010 by Michael Scott Moore

  1. The thing I have a genuine concern about when it comes to transportation manufacturing and design industries…it may be cheaper for taxes and real estate some place else, but the infrastructure being left behind to train those people to do the jobs well is nearly a century old; it just doesn’t get and and move, too. I mean this in the universities, especially. So now, do we have to wait another century for it to mature someplace else? How many generations of infrastructure are lost when a Boeing moves to South Carolina or Long Beach shuts down? Somewhere the idea that brain power and trade skills, good ones, are merely a commodity has to be reconciled with quality and innovation.

    — e    Jan 9, 10:57 am    #

  2. Not really on-topic, but you might enjoy my friend Charlie Haas’ new novel, The Enthusiast, which begins when the narrator’s father is hit by an aerospace closure. Wonderful book, trust me.

    — Ed Ward    Jan 9, 02:57 pm    #

  3. That’s perfectly on-topic. Thanks.

    — Mike    Jan 9, 04:38 pm    #