Tightest timeline that I think might be possible for purposes of deciding what can be resolved:

Flight 10 planned for 24 Aug
Week to convert pad back to SF format for ship 38 SF
2 Week from SF to launch flight 11 for ship and pad conversion during this time.
This takes us to mid Sep 2025 to complete flight 11.

Pad 2 looks months away from completion, as is B18, but maybe they could fly ship 39 on a v2 booster with a crossover HSR. so don't need pad 2 or B18 but do need ship 39, which has started some stacking.

Stacking to launch for a new version ship could take 5 months+. Getting this down to 3 months perhaps shouldn't be ruled out? But even if this period is surprisingly short, after flight 11 (mid September or later) they need to adjust pad for v3 ship launch and they still need to have pressure and cryo test v3 ship 39 and SF ship 39. It isn't clear when Masseys will be ready to do such testing and the launch pad might need modifications, and also there is booster 17 testing to do and pad is quite busy during a fast run to flight 11. So it is hard to see when testing of Ship 39 could be quickly done at pad so probably have to rely of Masseys being ready for ship testing. Pressure and Cryo test of ship 39 at Masseys by mid Sept seems ludicrously fast for ship 39 to be ready for this. Then 2 weeks to do a static fire and 2 weeks to a launch would also be crazy fast.

So planning to resolve to 14 Oct 2025 as no unless there are objections.

Ship 37 probably near ready for static fire
Ship 38 probably ready for cryo pressure testing
Ship 39 (v3) stacking not started.
Ships 40-42 further from ready based on pics of nosecones.

While expectation seems to be that ship 39 won't launch until near end of year at earliest, with 3 v2 boosters might they build another v2 ship and what is minimum time for this?

Can / should I resolve some of the early dates based on around a month from cryotest to launch and maybe ~about? another month as a minimum estimate for stack and build work? Or is it too uncertain about how quickly they will be able to go once they can static fire on pad A?

I am tending to assume Musks 2 to 3 week for a ship is a total rate from 6 stations in Megabays so it could well be a 3-5 months for stack and build work. But I am not sure and maybe less than 3 months is possible.

@ChristopherRandles we have loans so I don't see much reason to resolve early

@Mqrius I think I promised early resolution where it is very clear with saying "(Perhaps even a few days or a week before where situation is very clear.)"

Now that we have
https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/els/reports/STA_Print.cfm?mode=current&application_seq=144398&RequestTimeout=1000
from 14th July saying they are not planning flight 11, let alone flight 12, until 1 September 2025 at the earliest I think it is very clear for the first 4 options to 2 September. So I think I should resolve those.

Any objections to this?

@ChristopherRandles I personally don't have any stake in the market so whatever works for y'all :)

Wrong market type. Only one of these can resolve as YES. Buying NO across the board is a guaranteed winner.

@MaxA deliberately chosen so can resolve each one without having to wait many weeks.

Yes you can buy no across the board (I have already done some of that) but what should the distribution look like?

@ChristopherRandles It shouldn't be a distribution but a series like "11 weeks or less", "12 weeks or less", "13 weeks or less" etc. Like this for instance: https://manifold.markets/OlegEterevsky/when-will-starship-flight-10-happen

@MaxA That could well make sense, particularly if people prefer that. If others want to give opinion, let me know by commenting.

Too late to change this market now but may as well ask what people prefer.

Right now the percentages add up to 95%, so you'd actually want to buy Yes across the board. So generally this market works alright once it's corrected.

But personally I prefer voting on the "11 weeks or less" type, it's easier to think about and interact with.