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

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.