Theory:Doctor Who television discontinuity and plot holes/The Ark


 * It's rather remarkable that the TARDIS manages to land in the same spot twice (albeit a few years apart) when the Doctor can't control its journey.
 * The Doctor forgot to enter new spacial coordinates, or there was a breakdown in the mechanism, and only the time circuits were activated for this journey. This being the case, the TARDIS followed its default/emergency procedure (See TV: Terminus) of remaining locked-on to the Ark as a 'fixed point', even though it would have moved billions of miles through space in the intervening centuries it took to reach Refusis.
 * Actually the background changes so much that it is unlikely that the TARDIS landed in the exact same spot.


 * Alternatively, given the recent revelations in The Doctor's Wife, the TARDIS may have realised that the Doctor was partially responsible for causing the Monoids to overthrow the guardians, and taken him to the future because that is where he "needed to go" to put things right.
 * Even though I completely agree with this explaination (although for me, the TARDIS brought him there just because he needed to GO there, not precisely to help the guardians overthrow the Monoids but still to be involved in the events) I'd just like to point out than he DIDN'T landed on the exact same spot (well, not exactly.) Though he did landed around the same spot INSIDE the Ark, the ship was now "700 years of travel" away from its previous location from Part 1 & 2. In part 1 & 2, it was 700 years away fromi Refusis but in Part 3 & 4, it was like just one or two days away from the planet. (By the way, I know this isn't an argument AGAINST the previous point, but I didn't know where to put it. Also, English isn't my first language so I might have made some mistakes.)


 * First, The Doctor had no particular intention of returning to the ship, so that is somewhat irrelevant to the question. That said: (a) Is it remarkable? Yes. (b) Is it an amazing coincidence? Possibly (c) Unless it was part of some grander scheme/influence. (d) However, is it a discontinuity? Absolutely not.