Opportunities and Challenges of Promoting Scientific Dialog throughout Execution of Future Science-Driven Extravehicular Activity

Abstract

Science-driven, human spaceflight missions of the future will rely on regular and interactive communication between Earth- and space-based teams during activity in which astronauts work directly on Mars or other planetary surfaces (extravehicular activity, EVA). The Biologic Analog Science Associated with Lava Terrains (BASALT) project conducted simulated human missions to Mars, complete with realistic one-way light time (OWLT) communication latency. We discuss the modes of communication used by the Mars- and Earth-based teams, including text, audio, video, and still imagery. Real-time communication between astronauts in the field (extravehicular, EV) and astronauts in a communication relay station (intravehicular, IV) was broadcast over OWLT, providing important contextual information to the Science Backroom Team (SBT) in Mission Control. Collaborative communication between the Earth- and Mars-based teams, however, requires active communication across latency via the Mission Log. We provide descriptive statistics of text communication between IV and SBT in a high-fidelity, scientifically driven analog for human space exploration. Over an EVA, the SBT sent an average of ∼23 text messages containing recommendations, requests, and answers to questions, while the science-focused IV crew member (IV2) sent an average of ∼38 text messages. Though patterns varied, communication between the IV and SBT teams tended to be highest during ∼50–150 min into the EVA, corresponding to the candidate sample search and presampling instrument survey phases, and then decreased dramatically after minute ∼200 during the sample collection phase. Generally, the IV2 and SBT used ∼4.6 min to craft a reply to a direct question or comment, regardless of message length or OWLT, offering a valuable glimpse into actual time-to-reply. We discuss IV2-SBT communication within the context of case examples from an EVA during which communication failures affected operations in the field. Finally, we offer recommendations for communication practices for use in future analogs and, perhaps, science-driven human spaceflight.

Strategic Planning Insights for Future Science-Driven Extravehicular Activity on Mars

“…Here, the use of “long-term goals” refers to the overall science objectives of the program, spread across multiple deployments, whereas short-term refers to specific EVA ( e.g ., daily) objectives. Tactical elements related to the execution of EVAs and activity of the science team during an EVA are discussed in the work of Stevens et al (2019), the layout and functioning of the Earth-based MSC and SST is described in the work of Payler et al (2019), and modes and frequency of communication between the SST and EV/IV are presented in the work of Kobs Nawotniak et al (2019). This article presents and discusses the science organization and prioritization process needed to strategically plan science-driven EVAs and associated timelines that supported full duplex, Mars latency-tolerant operational communications scenarios at BASALT.…”

Using Science-Driven Analog Research to Investigate Extravehicular Activity Science Operations Concepts and Capabilities for Human Planetary Exploration

“…The primary role of IV2 was to ensure that the scientific objectives of the EVA were met. Responsibilities included (1) distilling and communicating presampling and sampling priorities between the EV crew and MSC, (2) clarifying scientific queries between the MSC and EV2, and (3) providing both general and specific scientific guidance while observing the EVA in real-time (Kobs Nawotniak et al , 2019).…”

Developing Intra-EVA Science Support Team Practices for a Human Mission to Mars

“…Due to the complexities of instrument deployment and sample collection, the structure and content of messages from ground to space were found to be particularly important to the success of the EVA. Message composition is discussed in more detail in the work of Kobs Nawotniak et al (2019).…”

“…Therefore, this early phase was used by the SST to provide feedback to EV on the content of the verbal descriptions and still image composition. This helped ensure high-quality data was being collected by EV and received in the SST (for more details on SST-IV communication see Kobs Nawotniak et al, 2019). During a real Mars mission this might have been less necessary due to more extensive EV training.…”

“…The sample location search and presampling survey (instrument deployment) phases were the busiest periods of the EVA for the SST. In these phases, the SST had to work cooperatively to assess each sample location identified by the EV team, rank the candidates for sampling on the dynamic leaderboard (see Stevens et al, 2019), and communicate these rankings and justifications to the IV (see Kobs Nawotniak et al, 2019). During the sample location search phase, the SST examined still images, listened to verbal descriptions from EV, and discussed which sample locations should be interrogated with field spectrometers.…”