the upcoming test is still not attempting orbit, but only about 3/4 of an orbit. :-/

I strongly suspect they're not going to actually aim for a fully orbital trajectory unless success is practically guaranteed. So I'm ~95% on this.

Damn lol I should have read the comments lol. Here’s hoping it also fails the second go around

Second one is probably aiming for the same almost-orbital trajectory, Elon said in twitter spaces yesterday.

This notes that the Monday 4/17 test is not planning on orbit, but a highly elliptical hop up to 235km and back down at around 3/4 of a turn around the earth into the Pacific
https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/04/green-light-go-spacex-receives-a-launch-license-from-the-faa-for-starship/

@BrianOlson So if that is accurate (virtually certain that it is), I take it this market stays open

That's my understanding, and the main reason I've got Yes

@BrianOlson Transatmospheric orbits are often still considered orbits.

@SeamusBronski Not in KSP :D

@Mqrius Starship notably did not launch in KSP

I'm aware. We're arguing definitions, not reality. So at this point it depends on who you ask, what standards you hold, and it comes down to the opinion of the market creator, who has already given his view.

A high energy highly elliptic path that intersects the surface of the planet is not an orbit (trans-lithic?)
Hopefully it'll be obvious when it works (or crashes). This market is still dependent on the stated plan of whatever the next flight(s).

The problem is that today's launch may have been targeting a lowest point that's like 50km above the surface. That's not high enough to do an orbit around the Earth, but it's also not low enough to intersect the surface of the planet. It intersects the atmosphere though.

We're also not exactly sure what they were planning. The tricky thing is that this market depends on what they're planning, and not just on what actually happens.

@Mqrius Yes, but it doesn't depend on the orbital parameters - the market description defines orbit as completing one pass around the earth at an altitude of >100km. We know they weren't intending that, and even if they were on an orbital trajectory with high perigee and subsequently did a deorbit burn to re-enter near Hawaii, they would still not count as being in orbit for the purposes of this market.

So when looking at that they intend, we're looking only at whether they intend to go around the earth at least once, which is a bit easier than figuring out what orbital parameters they were aiming for!

Yeah that's fair enough, I agree with that.

@BrianOlson Will you resolve this NO if the test is a complete success, but was never actually intended to complete a full orbit of earth?

@chrisjbillington Uf. Ok, if the first flight isn't an orbit attempt then I will wait for the first attempted orbit

@BrianOlson Heh, for what it's worth, the first test will be technically suborbital, depending on your definition. It will have a perigee in the atmosphere, so that it doesn't need to do a re-entry burn to re-enter. It will still be going at roughly orbital velocity, so it tests both getting up to orbital speeds and re-entering from orbital speeds, quite a step up from a new Shepard launch!