The understanding of paragraph 19

[Yusheng Huan]

Dear All,

I just found that I might not really get what paragraph was saying, and want to seek help from you.

The following is the confusing part of the paragraph:

'On 6 October 2044 at 0923 GMT, the PSDA was making an emergency manoeuvre of its

orbiting space station Iris, which was built and launched from Prospero in September 2039, to

avoid a previously-unseen large piece of debris when it was not able to shut down some of the

rockets on-board, causing the station to lose altitude."

And here is my understanding, which is rephrased as:

"A previously-unseen large piece of debris that was travelling in the space was threatening Iris. To avoid the threat, Iris needed to shut down some of rocket on-board, but failed, which led to the station's losing altitute."

1. Does it make sense...? And what's the right understanding of the description?

2. Besides, why Iris chose to separate from and discard the engines? How does it relate to the "station's loss of altitude"???

Thank you very much.

Best,

Yusheng

--

Yusheng Huan | Law and History | Class of 2014 | Peking University | +86.15201469549

[庞序]

Dear Yusheng,

Here are my understanding:

Shutting down some rocket on-board can avoid the debris, but PSDA failed to do so.

Alternatively, PSDA have to make an emergency manoeuvre, successfully avoid the debris.

However, the manoeuvre is too emergent, causing the station to lose altitude.

Still open for discussion.

Regards,

Pang

[Diana Gong]

Great question!! Vivian and I had discussed about this some time ago. And if I recalled correctly, it was sth like this:

1. There was a large piece of debris--threatening Iris

2. So Iris took actions: shut down some of rockets on-board, but failed to do so.

3. So Iris made an emergency manoeuvre, and this caused the losing of altitute.

After typing this, I noticed Pangxu's email. I agree with him

--

龚竞超　Diana Gong

北京大学法学院 Peking University Law School, Beijing, China

Try again. Fail again. Fail better.——Samuel Beckett

[Joe Pratt]

Hi everyone,

Here is another interpretation for your consideration:

1. A previously unseen large piece of debris threatened Iris.
2. To avoid the debris, Iris used its rocket engines in an emergency manoeuvre.
3. After the emergency manoeuvre, Iris could not shut down some of the rocket engines.
4. The rocket engines were causing Iris to lose altitude vis-a-vis the earth (to either fall out of its normal orbit or potentially re-enter the earth's atmosphere--very dangerous).
5. To stop the loss of altitude, Iris discarded two of the rocket engines.

It sounds to me like Iris used the rocket engines to avoid the previously unseen debris and then could not turn them off. Because it was such a dangerous situation, Iris then had to discard the engines.

Regards, Professor Joe

----- 原始邮件 -----
发件人: Diana Gong <dianag...@gmail.com>
抄送: mootcl...@googlegroups.com
已发送邮件: Tue, 14 May 2013 23:02:45 +0800 (CST)
主题: Re: The understanding of paragraph 19

Great question!! Vivian and I had discussed about this some time ago. And
if I recalled correctly, it was sth like this:
1. There was a large piece of debris--threatening Iris
2. So Iris took actions: shut down some of rockets on-board, but failed to
do so.
3. So Iris made an emergency manoeuvre, and this caused the losing of
altitute.


After typing this, I noticed Pangxu's email. I agree with him


On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 10:32 PM, Yusheng Huan <yushe...@gmail.com>wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> I just found that I might not really get what paragraph was saying, and
> want to seek help from you.
>
> The following is the confusing part of the paragraph:
>

> *'On 6 October 2044 at 0923 GMT, the PSDA was making an emergency

> manoeuvre of its
>
> orbiting space station Iris, which was built and launched from Prospero in
> September 2039, to
>
> avoid a previously-unseen large piece of debris when it was not able to
> shut down some of the
>

> rockets on-board, causing the station to lose altitude."*
> *
> *

>
> And here is my understanding, which is rephrased as:
>
> "A previously-unseen large piece of debris that was travelling in the
> space was threatening Iris. To avoid the threat, Iris needed to shut down
> some of rocket on-board, but failed, which led to the station's losing
> altitute."
>

> *1. Does it make sense...? And what's the right understanding of the
> description?*
> *
> *
> *2. Besides, why Iris chose to separate from and discard the engines? How
> does it relate to the "station's loss of altitude"???*

>
> Thank you very much.
>
> Best,
> Yusheng
>
>
>
>
>
> --

> *Yusheng Huan *| Law and History* *| Class of 2014 | *Peking University*