Every candidate I talk to asks about interview processes at the same four or five space companies, and every candidate has a different mental model of what to expect. Some of the mental models are accurate. Most are five years out of date, or they conflate one specific team's process with the whole company.
Below is what candidates report publicly, what job postings themselves tell us about interview format, and where the common myths are wrong. This isn't exhaustive. Interview processes change constantly and vary by team. Take the specifics as a starting point, not gospel.
SpaceX
Rough shape: recruiter screen, one or two technical phone screens, then a full onsite (Hawthorne, McGregor, or Starbase depending on team).
What SpaceX actually filters for: raw engineering competence, willingness to work hard, and mission fit. Their reputation for prioritizing "grinders" is real but overblown. Recent candidates report that senior IC interviews at SpaceX are much more technically demanding than they were pre-2022. They now do serious system design rounds for engineering leadership roles, and their hardware interview loops for propulsion and structures engineers include real design problems, not just resume walkthroughs.
Timeline: 3-6 weeks from application to offer in most cases. Some candidates report faster (2 weeks) for hot roles.
What the job posting signals show: 6% of SpaceX postings mention system design specifically, 18% mention onsite. That aligns with the reported experience — engineering leadership roles have real system design, most senior IC roles do have onsite loops.
Common myths:
- "SpaceX is a grind interview like Amazon." Not quite. The bar is high but the loop is shorter than Amazon's and less scripted. There's no "raise the bar" interviewer equivalent.
- "You need an aerospace degree." Only 5% of SpaceX postings actually specify aerospace. Physics, CS, ME/EE all work.
- "Elon interviews everyone." He hasn't interviewed rank-and-file engineers in years. Senior engineering leadership sometimes still gets an Elon touchpoint, and even that's inconsistent.
Preparation tips based on candidate reports:
- Study first-principles thinking on your specific engineering domain (propulsion, structures, avionics, software). SpaceX interviewers value showing your work.
- Be prepared to talk about specific hardware you've built. Vague resume walkthroughs get punished.
- Have a specific reason you want to work on the specific program you're interviewing for.
Rocket Lab
Rough shape: recruiter screen, hiring manager conversation, then either a virtual technical loop or an onsite in Long Beach or Auckland depending on the role.
What Rocket Lab actually filters for: real hands-on engineering experience, professional maturity, and cultural fit with a hardware-focused engineering organization.
Timeline: 4-8 weeks. Rocket Lab is not fast. The engineering leadership review process adds time.
What the postings signal: 58% of Rocket Lab postings mention onsite specifically, higher than SpaceX. That reflects the culture: they want to see you in the hangar.
Common myths:
- "Rocket Lab is like SpaceX Junior." No. Rocket Lab has a distinctly different engineering culture: more traditional aerospace, more program management structure, less Silicon Valley in style.
- "You need to relocate to New Zealand." False. The US engineering team in Long Beach has grown to be roughly comparable in size to the Auckland team.
Preparation tips:
- Emphasize your hardware experience. Show them you understand how test cadence and manufacturing tolerances actually work.
- Read up on Neutron. Rocket Lab expects candidates for engineering roles to understand what the company is building right now.
- Be honest about your comp expectations. Rocket Lab's comp is real but not top-of-market; misaligned expectations kill offers.
Anduril (space division)
Rough shape: recruiter screen, hiring manager conversation, one or two technical interviews, then an onsite (Costa Mesa or Playa Vista).
What Anduril actually filters for: engineering excellence, ability to work in a defense-tech environment, willingness to move fast within a mission-driven org.
Timeline: 3-5 weeks. Anduril moves fast when they want to hire someone.
Common myths:
- "Anduril requires US citizenship." Only 0-2% of Anduril postings explicitly require it, though 100% mention export controls somewhere. Green card holders and long-term residents are generally eligible for the majority of roles. See our longer breakdown for the specifics.
- "Anduril is just a defense contractor." It's not the culture of traditional defense contractors at all. Much closer to a growth-stage tech company that happens to work with government customers.
Preparation tips:
- Read the Lattice product overview. Anduril interviewers will assume you know what Lattice is.
- Understand DoD acquisition basics if you're interviewing for a program-adjacent role.
- Be direct in your interview responses. Anduril's culture rewards clear, unfluffy communication.
Relativity Space
Rough shape: recruiter screen, hiring manager, technical interviews, and (for most engineering roles) a mostly-virtual loop with occasional onsite for senior roles.
What Relativity actually filters for: engineering fundamentals, willingness to work on a hard problem (heavy-lift reusable), and ability to work in a fast-moving startup culture.
Timeline: 3-6 weeks.
What the postings signal: only 4% of Relativity postings mention onsite specifically, much lower than SpaceX or Rocket Lab. Their process has become more remote-friendly since 2022.
Common myths:
- "Relativity is going to fail because their reusable Terran R is behind schedule." This one has been said continuously since 2021. Depends on your risk tolerance.
- "3D-printing focus makes them a niche employer." Terran R has moved them beyond a pure 3D-printing story.
Preparation tips:
- Understand their production pivot to Terran R. Old interview prep about Terran 1 is out of date.
- If interviewing for hardware roles, know the difference between additive manufacturing and traditional production tolerances.
Vast
Rough shape: recruiter screen, technical interviews, onsite in Long Beach.
What Vast actually filters for: engineering excellence, willingness to bet on a small team with a very ambitious goal (Haven-1 commercial space station).
What the postings signal: 100% of Vast postings mention onsite. Their culture is heavily in-person. If you can't relocate to Long Beach, you probably can't work at Vast.
Timeline: 4-6 weeks.
Common myths:
- "Vast is a moonshot with no path to revenue." They have a real contract with NASA for potential ISS successor missions.
- "Founded by a crypto billionaire = not serious." Jed McCaleb has funded them from personal wealth but the engineering team is very serious.
Preparation tips:
- Know Haven-1's timeline. They plan to launch it into orbit.
- Be prepared for onsite. Vast doesn't hire remote.
Sierra Space
Rough shape: recruiter, hiring manager, technical loop, and typically a hybrid onsite (Louisville, Colorado, or Cape Canaveral for launch-adjacent roles).
What Sierra Space filters for: engineering experience (they're not new grad heavy), professional presence, and cultural fit with an org that includes both new-space and traditional-aerospace people.
Timeline: 5-8 weeks. Sierra is not fast. They have real corporate structure.
What the postings signal: only 1% of Sierra postings mention onsite specifically. Interpretations vary.
Common myths:
- "Sierra is a slow old-space company." Half true. They have both a slower legacy division (Dream Chaser hardware) and a much faster commercial LEO destination team (LIFE habitat).
Preparation tips:
- Understand Dream Chaser is landing at the runway, not splashing down.
- Understand LIFE is inflatable structures.
- Be prepared for a slower process.
Some general observations
Three things I've noticed across interview reports from the last twelve months.
System design interviews are becoming standard. Especially for senior IC and engineering leadership roles. 6% of SpaceX postings, 8% of Anduril postings, 15% of Vast postings, 10% of Sierra postings mention system design specifically. If you're a senior engineer, expect to run through at least one system design conversation at any of these companies.
Onsite is more common at hardware-forward companies. Vast, Rocket Lab, SpaceX, and Sierra all lean onsite. Software-forward space companies (Planet, Loft, Spire) run more remote loops. If you can't relocate, target software-forward companies first.
Take-home assignments are rare. Almost none of these companies use take-home coding assignments the way general software companies do. This is a hardware and mission-driven industry, and take-homes don't test the things they care about. If you get one, it's an outlier.
What actually gets people offers
Two things repeat in candidate reports as the differentiator:
Specific project experience related to what the company builds. If you're interviewing at Rocket Lab and you've built engine test hardware in college or in a previous job, put that at the top of your resume. If you're at Vast and you've done ECLSS or habitat systems work, lead with it. Interviewers at these companies care much more about specific relevant experience than general resume prestige.
Being able to walk through your thinking under pressure. Space companies specifically look for engineers who can explain their reasoning while solving a problem. If your interview style is silent-until-the-answer, work on this. The industry values "show your work" much more than most other technical fields.
Methodology
I combined three sources: 1) text search across active postings for specific interview-format language, 2) publicly reported interview experiences on Glassdoor, Blind, and Reddit, 3) private notes from candidates I've talked to over the last six months. Any specific company's process may look very different from what's described here depending on the specific team, hiring manager, and role level.
If you've interviewed at any of these companies recently and your experience differs meaningfully from what's described, email hello@madeforspace.io. Corrections are welcome.