Message-ID: <4729@ukc.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 13-Dec-84 09:09:47 EST
Article-I.D.: ukc.4729
Posted: Thu Dec 13 09:09:47 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 15-Dec-84 02:17:26 EST
References: <1193@bbncca.ARPA> <1194@bbncca.ARPA> <1115@ut-ngp.UUCP>
Reply-To: lkt@ukc.UUCP (L.K.Turner)
Followup-To: cmaz504ut-ngp.UUCP (Steve Alexander)
Distribution: net
Organization: Computing Laboratory, U of Kent at Canterbury, UK
Lines: 27
Xref: watmath net.movies:5213 net.sf-lovers:5378

Keywords:2010 mistakes 

 munch...munch...munch...>

In article <1115@ut-ngp.UUCP> cmaz504@ut-ngp.UUCP (Steve Alexander) writes:
 >
 > ......................... I had always thought that there were only 3 
 > and if one was lost with Frank Poole, another when Bowman had to enter
 > the ship manually (ahem) and the last when Bowman heads toward the
 > monolith then why is that one there?

In the book 2010 it explains that after Bowman had finished with HAL , he
bought back the pod (The one he lost while entering the ship manually ) under
remote control to the pod bay.

 > .................................... The suit without the helmet in the
 > docking bay may also be a blooper (shouldn't it be a helmet without a 
 > suit?) but I haven't seen 2001 in awhile.

I agree , this does seem to be a mistake.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  UUCP: ...!mcvax!ukc!lkt  ( L.K.Turner)