Question
toward 200 psi. Months later, after the accident investigation was complete, it was determined that, when No. 2 tank blew up, it either ruptured a line on the No. 1 tank, or caused one of the valves to leak. When the pressure reached 200 psi, the crew and ground controllers knew that they would lose all oxygen,
which meant that the last fuel cell would also die. At 1 hour and 29 seconds after the bang, Jack Lousma, then CapCom, said after instructions from Flight Director Glynn Lunney, "It is slowly going to zero, and we are starting to think about the LM
lifeboat." Swigert replied, "That's what we have been thinking about too." Ground controllers in Houston faced a formidable task. Completely new procedures had to be written and tested in the simulator before being passed up to the crew. The navigation problem had to be solved; essentially how, when, and in what attitude to burn the LM descent engine to provide a quick return
home.
With only 15 minutes of power left in the CM, CapCom told the crew to make their way into the LM. Fred and Jim Lovell quickly floated through the tunnel, leaving Jack to perform the last chores in the
Command Module. The first concern was to determine if there were enough consumables to get home.
The LM was built for only a 45-hour lifetime, and it needed to be stretch to 90. Oxygen wasn't a problem. The full LM descent tank alone would suffice, and in addition, there were two ascent-engine oxygen tanks, and two backpacks whose oxygen supply would never be used on the lunar surface. Two emergency
bottles on top of those packs had six or seven pounds each in them. (At LM jettison, just before reentry,
28.5 pounds of oxygen remained, more than half of what was available after the explosion.) Power was also a concern. There were 2,181 ampere hours in the LM batteries, Ground controllers carefully worked out a procedure where the CM batteries were charged with LM power. All non-critical systems were turned off and energy consumption was reduced to a fifth of normal, which resulted in having 20 percent of our LM electrical power left when Aquarius was jettisoned. There was one electrical close call during the mission. One of the CM batteries vented with such force that it momentarily dropped
off the line. Had the battery failed, there would be insufficient power to return the ship to Earth. Water was the main consumable concern. It was estimated that the crew would run out of water about five hours before Earth reentry, which was calculated at around 151 hours. However, data from Apollo 11 (which had not sent its LM ascent stage crashing into the Moon as in subsequent missions) showed that its mechanisms could survive seven or eight hours in space without water cooling. The crew conserved water. They cut down to six ounces each per day, a fifth of normal intake, and used fruit juices; they ate hot dogs and other wet-pack foods when they ate at all. The crew became dehydrated throughout the flight and set a record that stood up throughout Apollo: Lovell lost fourteen pounds, and the crew lost a total of 31.5 pounds, nearly 50 percent more than any other crew. Those stringent measures resulted in the crew
finishing with 28.2 pounds of water, about 9 percent of the total. Removal of Carbon Dioxide was also a concern. There were enough lithium hydroxide canisters, which remove carbon dioxide from the spacecraft, but the square canisters from the Command Module were not compatible with the round openings in the Lunar Module environmental system. There were four cartridges from the LM, and four from the backpacks, counting backups. However, the LM was designed
to support two men for two days and was being asked to care for three men nearly four days.
How effective is the use of technical language in the text? Cite specific textual evidence to support you answer.
which meant that the last fuel cell would also die. At 1 hour and 29 seconds after the bang, Jack Lousma, then CapCom, said after instructions from Flight Director Glynn Lunney, "It is slowly going to zero, and we are starting to think about the LM
lifeboat." Swigert replied, "That's what we have been thinking about too." Ground controllers in Houston faced a formidable task. Completely new procedures had to be written and tested in the simulator before being passed up to the crew. The navigation problem had to be solved; essentially how, when, and in what attitude to burn the LM descent engine to provide a quick return
home.
With only 15 minutes of power left in the CM, CapCom told the crew to make their way into the LM. Fred and Jim Lovell quickly floated through the tunnel, leaving Jack to perform the last chores in the
Command Module. The first concern was to determine if there were enough consumables to get home.
The LM was built for only a 45-hour lifetime, and it needed to be stretch to 90. Oxygen wasn't a problem. The full LM descent tank alone would suffice, and in addition, there were two ascent-engine oxygen tanks, and two backpacks whose oxygen supply would never be used on the lunar surface. Two emergency
bottles on top of those packs had six or seven pounds each in them. (At LM jettison, just before reentry,
28.5 pounds of oxygen remained, more than half of what was available after the explosion.) Power was also a concern. There were 2,181 ampere hours in the LM batteries, Ground controllers carefully worked out a procedure where the CM batteries were charged with LM power. All non-critical systems were turned off and energy consumption was reduced to a fifth of normal, which resulted in having 20 percent of our LM electrical power left when Aquarius was jettisoned. There was one electrical close call during the mission. One of the CM batteries vented with such force that it momentarily dropped
off the line. Had the battery failed, there would be insufficient power to return the ship to Earth. Water was the main consumable concern. It was estimated that the crew would run out of water about five hours before Earth reentry, which was calculated at around 151 hours. However, data from Apollo 11 (which had not sent its LM ascent stage crashing into the Moon as in subsequent missions) showed that its mechanisms could survive seven or eight hours in space without water cooling. The crew conserved water. They cut down to six ounces each per day, a fifth of normal intake, and used fruit juices; they ate hot dogs and other wet-pack foods when they ate at all. The crew became dehydrated throughout the flight and set a record that stood up throughout Apollo: Lovell lost fourteen pounds, and the crew lost a total of 31.5 pounds, nearly 50 percent more than any other crew. Those stringent measures resulted in the crew
finishing with 28.2 pounds of water, about 9 percent of the total. Removal of Carbon Dioxide was also a concern. There were enough lithium hydroxide canisters, which remove carbon dioxide from the spacecraft, but the square canisters from the Command Module were not compatible with the round openings in the Lunar Module environmental system. There were four cartridges from the LM, and four from the backpacks, counting backups. However, the LM was designed
to support two men for two days and was being asked to care for three men nearly four days.
How effective is the use of technical language in the text? Cite specific textual evidence to support you answer.
Answers
GPT-4o mini
The use of technical language in the text is highly effective in conveying the complex and critical nature of the Apollo 13 mission's issues. The author employs precise terminology and descriptions that help illustrate the technical challenges faced by the crew and ground controllers as they navigated an extremely dangerous situation. Specific elements of technical language enhance comprehension and lend credibility to the narrative.
1. **Terminology Related to Spacecraft Systems**: The text introduces terms like "fuel cell," "consumables," "ampere hours," and "lithium hydroxide canisters." For instance, the mention of "the last fuel cell would also die" underscores the urgency of the situation by specifying the technological components that are vital for life support. This precise language helps the reader understand the serious implications of power loss.
2. **Quantitative Data**: The use of numbers and measurements, such as "200 psi," "2,181 ampere hours," and "31.5 pounds," adds an objective dimension to the text. This is particularly evident in the phrase, "the crew lost a total of 31.5 pounds, nearly 50 percent more than any other crew." This quantitative detail not only emphasizes the severity of their dehydration but also provides a benchmark for comparison with other missions.
3. **Operational Procedures**: The description of the ground controllers’ efforts to create "completely new procedures" and the specific mention of "non-critical systems" reflects the technical complexity involved in responding to the emergency. The phrase "energy consumption was reduced to a fifth of normal" highlights the meticulous calculations required to conserve resources, demonstrating the cautious approach taken by the team.
4. **Technical Challenges and Solutions**: The text explains various challenges with precise explanations, such as the mismatch between "square canisters from the Command Module" and "round openings in the Lunar Module." This detail illustrates not only the technical constraints the crew faced but also the ingenuity required to find solutions under pressure.
5. **Descriptions of Equipment and Their Functions**: The text effectively describes equipment specifics, such as the "LM ascent-engine oxygen tanks" and "two backpacks whose oxygen supply would never be used on the lunar surface." These descriptions articulate the functionality and purpose of the equipment, as well as the strategic thinking involved in its utilization for survival.
In conclusion, the effective use of technical language in the text serves to provide readers with a clear understanding of the critical issues faced during the Apollo 13 mission. By employing specific terminology, quantitative measurements, and detailed descriptions of procedures and equipment, the author conveys the complexity of the situation while maintaining clarity for readers who may not have a deep technical background.
1. **Terminology Related to Spacecraft Systems**: The text introduces terms like "fuel cell," "consumables," "ampere hours," and "lithium hydroxide canisters." For instance, the mention of "the last fuel cell would also die" underscores the urgency of the situation by specifying the technological components that are vital for life support. This precise language helps the reader understand the serious implications of power loss.
2. **Quantitative Data**: The use of numbers and measurements, such as "200 psi," "2,181 ampere hours," and "31.5 pounds," adds an objective dimension to the text. This is particularly evident in the phrase, "the crew lost a total of 31.5 pounds, nearly 50 percent more than any other crew." This quantitative detail not only emphasizes the severity of their dehydration but also provides a benchmark for comparison with other missions.
3. **Operational Procedures**: The description of the ground controllers’ efforts to create "completely new procedures" and the specific mention of "non-critical systems" reflects the technical complexity involved in responding to the emergency. The phrase "energy consumption was reduced to a fifth of normal" highlights the meticulous calculations required to conserve resources, demonstrating the cautious approach taken by the team.
4. **Technical Challenges and Solutions**: The text explains various challenges with precise explanations, such as the mismatch between "square canisters from the Command Module" and "round openings in the Lunar Module." This detail illustrates not only the technical constraints the crew faced but also the ingenuity required to find solutions under pressure.
5. **Descriptions of Equipment and Their Functions**: The text effectively describes equipment specifics, such as the "LM ascent-engine oxygen tanks" and "two backpacks whose oxygen supply would never be used on the lunar surface." These descriptions articulate the functionality and purpose of the equipment, as well as the strategic thinking involved in its utilization for survival.
In conclusion, the effective use of technical language in the text serves to provide readers with a clear understanding of the critical issues faced during the Apollo 13 mission. By employing specific terminology, quantitative measurements, and detailed descriptions of procedures and equipment, the author conveys the complexity of the situation while maintaining clarity for readers who may not have a deep technical background.