We are used to the idea that a picture can convey more than words alone. But when the subject is complex, dynamic, and full of trade-offs, even pictures begin to fall short. Understanding often comes not from looking, but from doing.
Space exploration is one of the most complex endeavours humanity has ever engaged in – whether it is landing a car-sized rover on Mars or channelling satellite data to support Norfolk’s agriculture. It involves tightly coupled technical systems, long feedback loops, uncertainty, and decisions where small misunderstandings can have catastrophic consequences. Yet much of how we communicate about space -whether internally, publicly, or to stakeholders- still relies on largely outdated formats: reports, slides, diagrams, and videos. In my experience, those linear communication channels often struggle to keep up.
The history of space exploration offers many lessons about how hard it is to communicate, let alone manage complex systems. The loss of the Mars Climate Orbiter (caused by a unit conversion mismatch), or the crisis aboard Apollo 13, are often discussed in technical terms. However, they also point to something broader: understanding complex systems is not just an engineering challenge, but a human one.
This is where interactive communication goes from helpful to necessary. Interactivity is not about making things more entertaining. It is about allowing people to explore cause and effect, to test assumptions, and to experience trade-offs directly rather than being told about them. When people interact with a system, even a simplified one, they begin to build intuition: what changes quickly or slowly, what is fragile and what is robust. I’ve often seen that people understand constraints far more quickly when they encounter them through experience rather than just information.
Mission planning, systems engineering and operations all involve navigating uncertainty, feedback loops and constraints. Interactive communication does not remove complexity – but it can make it more legible. It allows people to see how outcomes emerge from decisions, rather than encountering results as static facts.
Interestingly, another field has spent decades refining ways of communicating complex systems: video games. Setting aside entertainment, games are sophisticated learning environments. They routinely teach players intricate rule-based systems without manuals, allowing understanding to emerge through participation. A well-known example is Kerbal Space Program, which helped a wide audience develop an intuitive grasp of orbital mechanics not through lectures, but through experimentation. The value here is not that it is a game about space, but that it demonstrates how complex subjects can be learned experientially.
The relevance of this approach is broad. In training and professional development, interactive systems can help teams explore scenarios, dependencies and risks in ways that static materials struggle to convey. In outreach and education, they offer ways for non-experts to meaningfully engage with space-related challenges rather than passively consuming information. For policymakers, investors and stakeholders, interactive models can make trade-offs and constraints visible, supporting more informed discussion.
My interest in this comes from a background designing educational games and training simulations. Across very different contexts and fields I have repeatedly seen that people grasp complexity more readily when they are allowed to act within a system, rather than being asked to understand it from the outside. The same patterns appear again and again: explanation informs, but participation is usually what turns information into understanding.
None of this suggests a single solution, or that interactive approaches should replace existing forms of communication. But it does mean that communication itself deserves to be treated as a design challenge, particularly in a sector where complexity is unavoidable. Interactive and immersive methods are already appearing in pockets across the space ecosystem. The opportunity lies in sharing lessons, experimenting thoughtfully, and learning from fields that have been grappling with similar problems for a long time.
As space continues to touch more industries and communities – from precision farming in the East of England’s agri-tech sector to the complex systems of offshore wind and maritime monitoring- the question may not be whether people are interested in space, but whether we are giving them tools that help them truly understand it.
What interactive tools will your team and investors leverage to master the complexity of our next-generation space opportunities?
Thanks for Reading.
Imre Jele – Atypical Types
+44 (0)7436 140185