# SOC 17-2011: Aerospace Engineers

> Occupation profile: https://www.xh1b.org/soc/17-2011

Employers filed 3,689 certified H-1B applications for Aerospace Engineers (17-2011) roles, requesting 5,665 workers. The average offered wage is $101,904/yr, 24% below the BLS national median ($134,960/yr). (2025, SOC 17-2011) The largest filers are Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation, CTS Technical Services, Inc. and Volt Management Corp.

| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Total filings | 3,689 |
| Total workers | 5,665 |
| Average offered wage | $102K |
| Average prevailing wage | $92K |
| BLS median wage | $135K |
| Latest BLS year in scope | 2025 |
| Profile benchmark SOC | 17-2011 |
| BLS area | U.S. |

Filing wage badges use the latest national BLS median. Their detail shows the benchmark code and year. A mapped comparator can use a different occupation from the direct-code profile benchmark above. It is a screening comparison, not a claim that the occupations are identical.

| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Offered vs BLS benchmark | -24% |

## Top employers (of 840)

| Employer | Filings | Workers | Avg wage | BLS median |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation](https://www.xh1b.org/org/gulfstream-aerospace-corporation-72dde328df) | 441 | 457 | $110K | $135K |
| [CTS Technical Services, Inc.](https://www.xh1b.org/org/cts-technical-services-inc-07f796d757) | 125 | 125 | $117K | $135K |
| [Volt Management Corp.](https://www.xh1b.org/org/volt-management-corp-fa71d29257) | 105 | 135 | $100K | $135K |
| [The Boeing Company](https://www.xh1b.org/org/the-boeing-company-6ae2baf44b) | 99 | 136 | $112K | $135K |
| [Goodrich Corporation](https://www.xh1b.org/org/goodrich-corporation-8fc8bd2536) | 96 | 96 | $90K | $135K |
| [Rockwell Collins Inc.](https://www.xh1b.org/org/rockwell-collins-inc-d11ec0a591) | 67 | 67 | $96K | $135K |
| [Cyient, Inc.](https://www.xh1b.org/org/cyient-inc-b6f0b5cce5) | 63 | 897 | $80K | $135K |
| [Joby Aero, Inc.](https://www.xh1b.org/org/joby-aero-inc-02d683f22c) | 61 | 61 | $154K | $135K |
| [SIA Enginering (USA) Inc.](https://www.xh1b.org/org/sia-enginering-usa-inc-1455842e44) | 54 | 61 | $124K | $135K |
| [California Institute of Technology/Jet Propulsion Laboratory](https://www.xh1b.org/org/california-institute-of-technologyjet-pr-5d86264561) | 48 | 48 | $110K | $135K |

## Filing trend

| Year | Filings | Workers | Median offered |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | 2 | 2 | $75K |
| 2010 | 64 | 64 | $85K |
| 2011 | 306 | 308 | $83K |
| 2012 | 183 | 192 | $80K |
| 2013 | 198 | 533 | $85K |
| 2014 | 196 | 815 | $85K |
| 2015 | 238 | 785 | $86K |
| 2016 | 242 | 721 | $90K |
| 2017 | 216 | 238 | $94K |
| 2018 | 198 | 216 | $96K |
| 2019 | 238 | 317 | $97K |
| 2020 | 202 | 202 | $109K |
| 2021 | 178 | 190 | $97K |
| 2022 | 231 | 241 | $106K |
| 2023 | 219 | 238 | $114K |
| 2024 | 216 | 216 | $118K |
| 2025 | 272 | 281 | $128K |
| 2026 | 40 | 40 | $139K |

## State filing trends (2015 to 2026)

| State | Total filings | 2026 filings | 2026 filings per 100k residents |
|---|---|---|---|
| [California](https://www.xh1b.org/state/ca) | 973 | 16 | 0.0 |
| [Georgia](https://www.xh1b.org/state/ga) | 384 | 6 | 0.1 |
| [Washington](https://www.xh1b.org/state/wa) | 242 | 1 | 0.0 |
| [Florida](https://www.xh1b.org/state/fl) | 194 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Texas](https://www.xh1b.org/state/tx) | 157 | 5 | 0.0 |
| [Alabama](https://www.xh1b.org/state/al) | 100 | 4 | 0.1 |
| [Kansas](https://www.xh1b.org/state/ks) | 91 | 1 | 0.0 |
| [North Carolina](https://www.xh1b.org/state/nc) | 79 | 3 | 0.0 |
| [Michigan](https://www.xh1b.org/state/mi) | 70 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Massachusetts](https://www.xh1b.org/state/ma) | 51 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [New York](https://www.xh1b.org/state/ny) | 49 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Illinois](https://www.xh1b.org/state/il) | 48 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Maryland](https://www.xh1b.org/state/md) | 44 | 2 | 0.0 |
| [Colorado](https://www.xh1b.org/state/co) | 43 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Indiana](https://www.xh1b.org/state/in) | 41 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Virginia](https://www.xh1b.org/state/va) | 39 | 1 | 0.0 |
| [Arizona](https://www.xh1b.org/state/az) | 38 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Nevada](https://www.xh1b.org/state/nv) | 37 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Iowa](https://www.xh1b.org/state/ia) | 36 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Pennsylvania](https://www.xh1b.org/state/pa) | 31 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Oklahoma](https://www.xh1b.org/state/ok) | 30 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Wisconsin](https://www.xh1b.org/state/wi) | 28 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Minnesota](https://www.xh1b.org/state/mn) | 26 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Connecticut](https://www.xh1b.org/state/ct) | 20 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [New Jersey](https://www.xh1b.org/state/nj) | 20 | 1 | 0.0 |
| [New Mexico](https://www.xh1b.org/state/nm) | 17 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Ohio](https://www.xh1b.org/state/oh) | 17 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Missouri](https://www.xh1b.org/state/mo) | 14 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [South Carolina](https://www.xh1b.org/state/sc) | 14 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Vermont](https://www.xh1b.org/state/vt) | 14 | 1 | 0.2 |
| [Tennessee](https://www.xh1b.org/state/tn) | 12 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Hawaii](https://www.xh1b.org/state/hi) | 8 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Mississippi](https://www.xh1b.org/state/ms) | 7 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Oregon](https://www.xh1b.org/state/or) | 7 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Utah](https://www.xh1b.org/state/ut) | 7 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Rhode Island](https://www.xh1b.org/state/ri) | 5 | 2 | 0.2 |
| [District of Columbia](https://www.xh1b.org/state/dc) | 4 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Delaware](https://www.xh1b.org/state/de) | 4 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [New Hampshire](https://www.xh1b.org/state/nh) | 4 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Arkansas](https://www.xh1b.org/state/ar) | 3 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [Wyoming](https://www.xh1b.org/state/wy) | 3 | 1 | 0.2 |
| [Kentucky](https://www.xh1b.org/state/ky) | 1 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [North Dakota](https://www.xh1b.org/state/nd) | 1 | 0 | 0.0 |
| [South Dakota](https://www.xh1b.org/state/sd) | 1 | 0 | 0.0 |


Per 100k residents uses the U.S. Census Bureau annual population estimate for that state and year; years after the latest published estimate carry that estimate forward. The latest filing year may be a partial period.

## More

- Full page (charts, tables, interactive): https://www.xh1b.org/soc/17-2011
- JSON API: https://www.xh1b.org/api/soc-employers?code=17-2011
- JSON API: https://www.xh1b.org/api/soc-filings?code=17-2011


## References

<a id="reference-data-lca-data-bls-data-soc-system-calculation-method-indicators-method-lca-data"></a>

1. Dataset documentation · DOL OFLC. [LCA public disclosure record layout (FY2026 Q3)](https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/oflc/pdfs/FY26Q3/LCA_Record_Layout_FY2026_Q3.pdf). Pages 1–4: application, DOL outcome and dates, requested positions, employer, representatives, worksites and pay units. This layout covers determinations issued October 1, 2025 through June 30, 2026. It documents employer-provided application fields and DOL decisions, not USCIS decisions, payroll verification, legal bills or worker-linked moves. Older layouts can differ. Checked 2026-10-17.

<a id="reference-data-lca-data-bls-data-soc-system-calculation-method-indicators-method-bls-data"></a>

2. Dataset documentation · BLS. [OEWS technical notes (May 2025)](https://www.bls.gov/oes/2025/may/oes_tec.htm). Scope of the survey; occupational coding; concepts and estimation methodology. Documents occupation and geographic wage estimates, not an individual worker’s pay. Use the estimate year and geography stated by the site; older releases can differ. Checked 2026-10-17.

<a id="reference-data-lca-data-bls-data-soc-system-calculation-method-indicators-method-soc-system"></a>

3. Guidance · BLS. [Standard Occupational Classification](https://www.bls.gov/soc/finding_soc_code.htm). Classification Principles 1–2 and Coding Guideline 2; job duties, not job titles. Checked 2026-10-08.

<a id="reference-data-lca-data-bls-data-soc-system-calculation-method-indicators-method-calculation-method"></a>
<a id="reference-data-lca-data-bls-data-soc-system-calculation-method-indicators-method-indicators-method"></a>

4. XH1B method or registry · XH1B. [Calculation and Matching Methods; Reading Public Records and Derived Indicators](https://www.xh1b.org/data-sources). Filing units, annualization, weighting, wage comparisons, and inference limits; Reading records: units, source coverage, wage gaps, entity links, and inference limits. These are the site's review methods, not validated predictions of wrongdoing. Inspect underlying records and alternative explanations.