# Crew of the Discovery in 2001 a Space Odyssey **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [June 22, 2018, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598 "2018-06-22T23:13:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2018, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/21 "2018-06-23T20:33:45Z")
Nope - but it was no coincidence that most of the women in _TOS_ mainly carried clipboards for the captain to sign, wore minidresses, opened “hailing frequencies”, and not much else. They generally weren’t the ones going on the landing parties to explore dangerous new planets. Women became much more active participants, even captains, in the later _Trek_ series. The had black crew members on\* TOS\*, too (one was even a woman!), but again, their duties were limited. The _Enterprise_ crew and who did what reflected 1960’s America pretty strongly. Even if two of the main crew were played by Canadians. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2018, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/22 "2018-06-23T20:43:02Z")
I watched the movie a week or 2 ago and was struck by how poorly it has aged. Space is a big empty place where shit happens very rarely: there was really no reason to have any of the crew unfrozen for most of the voyage, a real Discovery would have drone EVA, not human, because outside is a very bad place for people, and there would have been much better system redundancy (HAL probably would not have had full control over the SA units, where he could just shut them off like that). If you had a guy like our _Stranger on a Train_ designing the ship, even in the '60s, it would have looked much different. But, I guess you basically have to do everything wrong in order to have a plot. ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2018, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/23 "2018-06-23T21:36:41Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > …a real Discovery would have drone EVA, not human, because outside is a very bad place for people,… Not sure I agree. I’m reading a book about robotics in various environments and it goes into some detail about the Space Shuttle missions to service the Hubble Telescope. It was hoped that such missions would be done remotely, and the Hubble was designed with that in mind. What happened in the end, though, was to put an astronaut on the end of the shuttle’s arm and use that to position him for the repair. That worked out very well. No matter how hard you try, issues will come up that you weren’t expecting, and you’ll need someone on hand who can improvise. On one of the Hubble missions, might have even been the first, the door for the telescope’s electronics bay wouldn’t close properly. If the two astronauts pressed as hard as they could, they could hold the door closed, but they needed a fifth hand to latch the door in place. They devised a procedure where they used a strap to pull the doors closed and hold them in place until one of them could move the latch. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2018, 7:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/24 "2018-06-24T07:19:48Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > Nope - but it was no coincidence that most of the women in _TOS_ mainly carried clipboards for the captain to sign, wore minidresses, opened “hailing frequencies”, and not much else. They generally weren’t the ones going on the landing parties to explore dangerous new planets. > > Women became much more active participants, even captains, in the later _Trek_ series. > > The had black crew members on\* TOS\*, too (one was even a woman!), but again, their duties were limited. The _Enterprise_ crew and who did what reflected 1960’s America pretty strongly. Even if two of the main crew were played by Canadians. TOS if made today would be different, but in 1966 it was more advanced than just about any TV show around. (Though Roddenberry would be in serious #Metoo trouble.) In the first 10 episodes or so Nichelle Nichols had more screen time than just about anyone except Nimoy, Shatner and Kelley. She also was on landing parties. In “Court Martial” the prosecuting attorney was a woman, and on Space Seed a major female character was a historian. Maybe Start Trek did not reflect America perfectly, but it sure came closer to the usual lily white TV show of the era. BTW in Court Martial Kirk’s superior officer, an Admiral, was black. It was not commented on, and today it’s obviously no big deal, but I bet heads exploded all over Alabama and Mississippi. And the First Officer in the first pilot was female. The network made Roddenberry replace her. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2018, 7:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/25 "2018-06-24T07:25:03Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > I watched the movie a week or 2 ago and was struck by how poorly it has aged. Space is a big empty place where shit happens very rarely: there was really no reason to have any of the crew unfrozen for most of the voyage, a real Discovery would have drone EVA, not human, because outside is a very bad place for people, and there would have been much better system redundancy (HAL probably would not have had full control over the SA units, where he could just shut them off like that). If you had a guy like our _Stranger on a Train_ designing the ship, even in the '60s, it would have looked much different. But, I guess you basically have to do everything wrong in order to have a plot. As I said, nothing except HAL failed on Discovery, and HAL’s failure was inconsistent programming - he was right when he said it was due to human error. If HAL was given the ability to monitor and adjust the SA units, I don’t see how he could be kept from breaking them. In the book HAL kills them by opening the doors and letting the air out while Bowman was out going after Poole. That would have done it too. Given that they were investigating something totally mysterious, I don’t think a drone EVA would cut it. And while their AI is ahead of ours, their robotics is nowhere to be seen. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2018, 7:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/26 "2018-06-24T07:28:12Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > _Clarke_ could have conceived of it… the general public not so much. Remember that _Star Trek_ was cancelled due to low numbers of viewers, and the idea behind making any book into a movie is to _make money_ - meaning, convince the general public to come pay to see it. 2001 actually made a ton of money, and the presence or absence of women had nothing to do with it. I doubt a woman running around the ring on Discovery would have hurt ticket sales at all. But none of that is what 2001 is about. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/the_other_waldo_pepper/32/12370_2.png) [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2018, 11:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/27 "2018-06-24T11:05:30Z")
> [@ssgenius](#): > > Yes, I know that it is a 1960s movie but women were just as capable and their smaller size might actually be an advantage IIRC, that last bit got pointed out in 1970s comic books — namely, Superman’s. The idea was, they wanted to do stories about what Krypton had been like; and the one guy who rocketed a baby off the doomed planet was Superman’s _dad,_ right? So figure he was a rocket scientist; and figure he’d worked for Krypton’s almost-ready space program; and, since we know he was _married_ — to the rare _other_ Kryptonian that folks know — figure his wife should feature in the stories; but since they never said she’d helped build the rocket, figure she was there as an astronaut; and figure characters should talk about women being better astronauts… ---
**Author:** ![dtilque](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d6d6ee/32.png) [@dtilque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dtilque)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2018, 10:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/28 "2018-06-25T10:31:38Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > I believe I’ve read somewhere that the Discovery used small atomic bombs for thrust, as was proposed at the time before various nuclear arms in space treaties banned it. Nope, no bombs on the Discovery. Look at the image of it from behind on [this page](http://2001.wikia.com/wiki/Discovery_1). There’s six rocket nozzles in the rear. And no pusher plate that you’d need for bomb thrust. Furthermore, the shape of the Discovery is way wrong for that kind of propulsion. For an Orion-type ship, you want short and stout, not long and spindly. The reason it was long was that there was a nuclear reactor back there and instead of massive shielding, it had lesser shielding but they moved it as far away from the crew quarters as they could. ---
**Author:** ![DesertDog](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/desertdog/32/11503_2.png) [@DesertDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DesertDog)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2018, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/29 "2018-06-25T19:31:26Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > Because in the 1960’s it was inconceivable that you’d send women into space on a potentially dangerous mission. Because in the 1960’s by and large women were NOT seen as being as smart and capable as men. The fact you ask that question shows just how much society has changed since then. It wasn’t until 1973 that any major US airline hired a woman to fly an _airplane,_ much less pilot a spaceship. Behold, the [_Mercury 13_](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpiVx2mQhKI). Watchig it made me annoyed at society and sad for them at the same time. ---
**Author:** ![Pork\_Rind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pork_rind/32/111_2.png) [@Pork\_Rind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pork_Rind)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2018, 8:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/30 "2018-06-25T20:18:42Z")
> [@ssgenius](#): > > Yet a further trip to Jupiter has only Bowman and Poole plus the 3 in suspended animation. The book makes the point that per the thinking at the time, the Discovery needed _no_ crew for the trip to Jupiter. HAL was presumed to be enough with the addition of the scientists in deep freeze. Poole and Bowman essentially had nothing to do (they read newspapers, studied interesting subjects and played chess with Hal) until the supposed equipment failure occurred. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2018, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/31 "2018-06-25T22:40:45Z")
Stanley Kubrick was a genius, but based on his filmography, he wasn’t exactly what you’d call progressive when it came to female characters. As for Arthur C. Clarke, he was very much a man of his time. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2018, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/32 "2018-07-05T20:02:48Z")
Bowman and Poole were equals to virtually all intents and purposes, but Bowman was designated as the mission commander. If push came to shove, he was in charge. There have been some NASA studies IIRC as to having married couples in spaceship crews, but the key obstacles have been that the mix of personalities, skills or expertise each couple has might not fit the mission’s needs, and that the alpha in any particular couple might not the “right” one (say Spouse A is the pushy but skilled scientist but Spouse B is the quiet one otherwise well-suited for command). Allen Steele’s sf novel _Labyrinth of Night_ has a Mars mission with IIRC four married couples as crew; two of the eight people have an affair once on Mars, which fortunately doesn’t lead to the big and potentially mission-endangering problems you can easily imagine it might very far from home. > [@Voyager](#): > > …I believe I’ve read somewhere that the Discovery used small atomic bombs for thrust, as was proposed at the time before various nuclear arms in space treaties banned it… Clarke and Kubrick considered that ([Project Orion (nuclear propulsion) - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion))) but rejected it, in part because they thought it might be seen as a comment on _Dr. Strangelove_. Instead, _Discovery_ had nonexplosive thermonuclear propulsion of some unspecified type: [Discovery One - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_One) > [@Voyager](#): > > …women doctors were common in the Soviet Union long before they were common here. As Hedrick Smith noted in _The Russians_, however, the medical profession was not held in nearly as high esteem in the USSR as in the US at the time. It was, to some extent, a pink-collar ghetto much as nursing and public-school teaching was in the US. > [@dtilque](#): > > Nope, no bombs on the Discovery. Look at the image of it from behind on [this page](http://2001.wikia.com/wiki/Discovery_1). There’s six rocket nozzles in the rear. And no pusher plate that you’d need for bomb thrust. Furthermore, the shape of the Discovery is way wrong for that kind of propulsion. For an Orion-type ship, you want short and stout, not long and spindly. > > The reason it was long was that there was a nuclear reactor back there and instead of massive shielding, it had lesser shielding but they moved it as far away from the crew quarters as they could. Correct. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2018, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/33 "2018-07-06T04:32:34Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Stanley Kubrick was a genius … That is actually debatable. _… or how I leaned to stop worrying …_ was undeniably brilliant _in toto_, but to be called a genius, he would have to at least be good. The performances in all of his subsequent movies were almost painfully wooden (apart from the moments of violence or fury). If getting a convincing, evocative or interesting performance out of an actor is not part of being a competent director, then I will allow that Kubrick is a genius – but I think discarding that important metric is going too far. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2018, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/34 "2018-07-06T15:13:20Z")
I would like to comment on crew size. You only bring along as many crew as you think you are going to need to get stuff done. (More crew means more food, water, and messing/berthing space are going to be required. On a space ship, more cargo means more fuel or thrust required to go places.) As things get mechanized or automated, less actual monkeys with thumbs are needed. HMS Victory (1778), roughly 230 feet long, 850 crew, 104 guns. (Sails, guns. Large crew is always a plus in boarding actions!) No automation or machinery at all. 6500 square yards of sail, 11 knots max. 3500 tons. HMS Devastation (1873), roughly 307 feet long, 410 crew, 24 guns. (First British capital ship that completely dispensed with sails, although they will be used on other classes during the period.) 5600 HP from 8 boilers, 15 knots. 13000 tons. HMS Majestic (1895), the classic late-Victorian age pre-dreadnought. 420 feet long, 670 crew, 40 guns. 10000 ihp, 16 knots. 16000 tons. HMS Dreadnought (1906). 527 feet long, 800 crew, 37 guns. 23000 shp from 18 boilers for 21 knots, 21000 tons. HMS Vanguard (1993, SSBN). 490 feet long, 135 crew, 4 torpedo tubes, 16 ballistic missile tubes. Nuclear reactor powering two turbines for 27500 shp, giving 30-ish (? classified) knots at a sprint, in a 16000 tons streamlined hull. Remember, these are all warships, with weapons systems that need to be manned. (Low to moderate mechanization/automation.) Discovery is probably unarmed. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2018, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/35 "2018-07-06T19:39:15Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > That is actually debatable. _… or how I leaned to stop worrying …_ was undeniably brilliant _in toto_, but to be called a genius, he would have to at least be good. The performances in all of his subsequent movies were almost painfully wooden (apart from the moments of violence or fury). If getting a convincing, evocative or interesting performance out of an actor is not part of being a competent director, then I will allow that Kubrick is a genius – but I think discarding that important metric is going too far. If you read the recent book on the making of 2001, you’ll see that Kubrick worked hard with his actors to get the performance that both he and they wanted. In 2001 the woodenness was the point. Note that the apes were hardly wooden. Someone being a genius is always open to debate, but the people who worked with him on 2001 definitely thought he was. And he had other bad qualities also. ---
**Author:** ![Marvin\_the\_Martian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/marvin_the_martian/32/2898_2.png) [@Marvin\_the\_Martian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marvin_the_Martian)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2018, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/36 "2018-07-06T21:20:56Z")
If I recall the book correctly (and I know the book and movie were developed concurrently, so which is canon is up for debate) Discovery was built for a different mission (round trip to Jupiter) and was only re-purposed for the trip to Saturn after the discovery of TMA-1. The trip to Saturn was at the extreme limit of the ship’s capability, and there was not enough fuel for a return flight - the crew would all go into hibernation at the end of the mission and wait for a future rescue mission. Such a tight mission budget would necessitate the smallest possible crew that could still complete the mission with a reasonable chance of success. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2018, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/37 "2018-07-06T23:32:15Z")
That’s pretty much how I remembered it. How many astronauts today would be willing to bet their lives that Congress would authorize and fully fund a rescue mission before they even left? ---
**Author:** ![Icerigger](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icerigger/32/432_2.png) [@Icerigger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icerigger)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2018, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/38 "2018-07-06T23:56:02Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Stanley Kubrick was a genius, but based on his filmography, he wasn’t exactly what you’d call progressive when it came to female characters. > > As for Arthur C. Clarke, he was very much a man of his time. Just for the record the captain of the Leonov in 2010 was female. ---
**Author:** ![ssgenius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5ac83/32.png) [@ssgenius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ssgenius)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2018, 8:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/39 "2018-07-07T08:05:23Z")
> [@mlees](#): > > I would like to comment on crew size. You only bring along as many crew as you think you are going to need to get stuff done. (More crew means more food, water, and messing/berthing space are going to be required. On a space ship, more cargo means more fuel or thrust required to go places.) As things get mechanized or automated, less actual monkeys with thumbs are needed. > > HMS Victory (1778), roughly 230 feet long, 850 crew, 104 guns. (Sails, guns. Large crew is always a plus in boarding actions!) No automation or machinery at all. 6500 square yards of sail, 11 knots max. 3500 tons. > > HMS Devastation (1873), roughly 307 feet long, 410 crew, 24 guns. (First British capital ship that completely dispensed with sails, although they will be used on other classes during the period.) 5600 HP from 8 boilers, 15 knots. 13000 tons. > > HMS Majestic (1895), the classic late-Victorian age pre-dreadnought. 420 feet long, 670 crew, 40 guns. 10000 ihp, 16 knots. 16000 tons. > > HMS Dreadnought (1906). 527 feet long, 800 crew, 37 guns. 23000 shp from 18 boilers for 21 knots, 21000 tons. > > HMS Vanguard (1993, SSBN). 490 feet long, 135 crew, 4 torpedo tubes, 16 ballistic missile tubes. Nuclear reactor powering two turbines for 27500 shp, giving 30-ish (? classified) knots at a sprint, in a 16000 tons streamlined hull. > > Remember, these are all warships, with weapons systems that need to be manned. (Low to moderate mechanization/automation.) Discovery is probably unarmed. Excellent points. The large crews on these ships (granted most of them are weapons systems) show that more than 2 would needed on the Discovery. Off hand if I was crewing the Discovery 2 Pilots (running 12 hour shifts) 2 Maintenance/Engineers. - The assumption the movie is making is that, nothing fails (except for antenna) Realistically, over a 18 month mission, something is bound to go wrong , I would have 2 engineers dedicated to maintenance and as long as they aren’t named Rimmer and Lister (from Red Dwarf), that should work. One to monitor Hal and adjust his programming (as needed). With the supercomputers of today (ie Watson) they are constantly tweaking his programming. That’s 5 at a minimum. If we use Star Trek as a guide, there would also be Communications officer Science Officer Counselor/Empath Helmsman and Navigator Doctor and Nurse Adding those in I get 12 (The Counselor/Empath is somewhat sarcastic) Yes, I realize that more people mean more supplies required and that is something at a premium) Still I would think that a crew of 10 is more realistic. One more point before I give this topic a rest. Captain James Cook made 3 voyages of 18 months to several years. His crew complement was 94, 108, and 90 for each ---
**Author:** ![Marvin\_the\_Martian](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/marvin_the_martian/32/2898_2.png) [@Marvin\_the\_Martian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marvin_the_Martian)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2018, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598/40 "2018-07-07T19:54:40Z")
> [@ssgenius](#): > > 2 Pilots (running 12 hour shifts) > 2 Maintenance/Engineers. - The assumption the movie is making is that, nothing fails (except for antenna) What do you need a dedicated pilot for? 99% of the trip you are just drifting in the direction of your initial acceleration. Better to have two with the job description pilot/maintenance/engineer - i.e., Bowman and Poole. > [@ssgenius](#): > > One to monitor Hal and adjust his programming (as needed). With the supercomputers of today (ie Watson) they are constantly tweaking his programming. The assumption was that HAL would perform perfectly (his failure to do so is a major plot point). Plus there was a secrecy requirement that the non-hibernating astronauts would not know the real mission. Besides, Bowman knew enough to disable HAL’s higher thought processes while maintaining the central nervous system of the ship. That is a major adjustment to HAL’s programming. > [@ssgenius](#): > > If we use Star Trek as a guide, there would also be > > Communications officer > Science Officer > Counselor/Empath > Helmsman and Navigator > Doctor and Nurse The hibernating astronauts _were_ the science officers (mission specialists). As to the rest, (1) you are only communicating with Earth, and only occasionally so no need for a communications officer; (2) helmsman and navigator - any course calculations which have not been made ahead of time would be done by ground control and/or HAL; (3) doctor and nurse - a doctor might be useful, but given the small size of the crew hardly necessary, especially on a hastily prepared emergency mission. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/crew-of-the-discovery-in-2001-a-space-odyssey/816598.md?page=3)