Can we clear out April 1st and add July 1st and August 1st?

@AndrewMeyer 8th & 15th May seems more relevant with 1 June at 88%

@AndrewMeyer Done. Sorry for the delay -- I'm travelling.

@OlegEterevsky no rush! Thank you for making these markets. I really enjoy them.

No static fires or even roll out notices for 33 engine booster 19 or for ship 39 yet, let alone inspections, final preps, load semi-dumblinks, stack and test pad SQD systems, destack fit FTS ...

I think before 1 April 2026 could easily resolve.
Possibly also 8 April - usually get NOTMARs / NOTAMs about a week to 10 days before launch but waiting until ~ 2nd April or even a little later might be reasonable for the before resolving 8th April question.

@ChristopherRandles I agree that it's extremely unlikely but don't ever resolve the markets negatively before the target dates, unless the positive resolution is physically impossible.

@OlegEterevsky Fair enough.

I like to try to get my large positions resolved before season end where possible, so ... I guess it is physically possible to omit static fires and maybe more has been done in preparation than we know. There is a FCC licence which starts 7th April but updated dates for that might be possible just minutes before launch. Notices to evacuate Boca Chica for possible overpressure event on launch go out the day before, but if a judge agrees some accelerated process perhaps that is physically possible with only a few hours. Road closures might be possible with little notice but I am less sure that is the case for more official notices like NOTMAR NOTAM TFR but maybe everyone is somehow informed and co-operates to keep the keep clear areas clear even if they were actually issued too late to be enforceable. So maybe as little as a couple of hours for transport to pad, stack and half hour prop load is all that is needed for 'physical possibility'. We know ship quick disconnect hasn't been tested on the pad as that requires a full stack but maybe just a few minutes testing is enough for that.

From ~9pm CDT on 31st gives you a few hours to resolve before season ends 🤣 😂

@ChristopherRandles I sympathize, but I want to keep it simple and don't want to introduce any judgement calls in the resolution, so I intend to wait until April 1 and resolve then.

@ChristopherRandles remember that Chinese static fire that accidentally turned into a launch like 2y ago?

@chrisjbillington Static fire requires fuelling and other ground support equipment which still requires movement of at least ship or booster quite possibly both (or it isn't an integrated test flight that would count as flight 12) to a place where vehicle can be fuelled and static fired.

So I still think transport of vehicles to a site where they can be loaded with some relevant fuel and other ground support equipment is available plus the loading of some fuel are still physical requirements as I claimed in last post.

Maybe SPMTs have higher top speed when loaded but even if you reduce the time while travelling, you still have some periods prepping for transport and stacking at the launch pad. I expect 3 hours is lowballing the physically impossible time but it may be possible to argue for 'an incident' as soon as a tiny amount of fuel has been loaded for a static fire but I am not really seeing any scope to reduce physical possibility time to less than a couple of hours

It certainly isn't happening today, no road delays, let alone closures or NOTMAR NOTAM TFRs etc There is a TFR at Masseys presumably for ship 39 static fire running from April 3 to April 14 so that shows the plans aren't to do a static fire today and I doubt full stack at Masseys is possible.

But creator has said what he is going to do and that is fine.

I think we should add a "Before 2026-06-01" option.

@AndrewMeyer Done

what happened to 1 launch a month... cmon spacex

@Blomfilter Obviously that never applied to a new version of Starship.

Also it was '1 every 3 to 4 weeks'
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1927531406017601915
"Launch cadence for next 3 flights will be faster, at approximately 1 every 3 to 4 weeks."

That was when they were expecting 3 more v2 launches before a gap before v3 launch at end of 2025. One ship blew up so there were only 2 launches with flights 10 and 11 caused a long delay with damage at Masseys and work arounds at pad, then a booster destroyed itself. So a delay of only ~4 months might be considered rather fast.

@Blomfilter What happened to the plans to colonize Mars? Surely the first manned missions returning from the city on Mars back to Earth will arrive soon, right?

In other words: why would you even remotely believe anything that Musk ever promises?

@FlorisvanDoorn
What happened to electric vehicles?
Oh, only the world's best selling car model for last 2 consecutive years
What happened to landing falcon 9 boosters?
Oh, 500+ of those.
Catching wolrds largest, heavier than air, flying object with chopsticks
Done that.
Some timelines can be rather aggressive but remotely believing what he says will eventually happen seems a better prior than just disbelieving him. (Yes it isn't a perfect prior but better than Musk disbelief.)

@ChristopherRandles
Sure, some of Musk's companies have done some impressive things.

That said, even on electric vehicles I'd be very happy to bet against almost any Musk prediction:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_predictions_for_autonomous_Tesla_vehicles_by_Elon_Musk

I'm surprised that that page doesn't say anything about the Tesla Roadster, unveiled Nov 2017, that would be available in 2020. Let's see if he will be off by more or less than a factor of 3.

I don't disagree that many things that he promises will eventually happen. Often not within double the predicted time frame though. I'm happy to amend my statement to "why would you even remotely believe any timeline that Musk ever promises?"

About the rocket catch: sure that's impressive. But is it a lot more impressive/practical than the space shuttle landings, which happened as early as 1981?

@ChristopherRandles Want to make a market that Musk's claims on Dwarkesh's podcasts about the quantity of AI datacenters in space will turn out to be true? I'm happy to bet that he is off by at least a factor of 10 in power usage of orbiting datacenters or by many years (or both).

@FlorisvanDoorn That's a good idea for a market. I would create one except I'm not sure how to get reliable data for the total energy consumption of such datacenter.

Like, for instance, imagine we had market for the total power consumption of the Starlink constellation. It's easy enough to estimate the ballpark, but getting any kind of official data even within a factor of 2x is challenging.

@OlegEterevsky @FlorisvanDoorn

https://manifold.markets/ZviMowshowitz/will-space-be-the-cheapest-place-to

Will space be the cheapest place to put AI by end of Feb 2029?
(possible AI resolution)

Without allowing any Elon time margin, unsurprisingly this has reduced to 4%. Maybe a set with end of 2029, 2030 2031 [optionally also 32 33 34] dates would be more interesting?

https://manifold.markets/jim/will-at-least-1-of-datacenter-capac
Will at least 1% of datacenter capacity be in space by EOY 2028?
seems less likely but slightly higher %.

Also
https://manifold.markets/JakobBrunker/space-datacenter-industry-generates
Space datacenter industry generates $100M+ annual revenue by December 31, 2029

@ChristopherRandles Idk how it's called but I like to call it Nostradamus fallacy
If your claim to fame is saying x will happen, but 5 % of x happens, you don't get 5 % of the credit, let alone 100 %. No brownie points. "Eventually" includes any arbitrary number of years.

@Lilemont How does that credit/brownie points thing of yours work if people think 2% of your target in the timeframe is ridiculous to the point of being impossible but you actually do 10% in the timeframe and 100% in 3 times as long as first estimated and then go on to be even more ambitious?

If 2% was ambitious and you achieve 10%, that is five times better than ambitious achieved. This actual achievement seems way more important that the timeframe estimate error which is pretty minor with such crazy high ambitions. .

I am happy in my assessment of Elon having achieving great things and hopefully there is more to come.

Ship 39 finally rolls out for pressure and cryotests at Masseys.

Then there is roll back to add at least the engines, then to Masseys for static fire, some final preps, roll to pad to test out SQD systems, maybe a WDR, fit FTS, stack, fuel and launch. Oh and while that is going on also need to finish any work on pad2, finish adding engines to B19, roll B19 to pad, test out pad with booster (maybe a few weeks?), static fire the booster, a few final preps, install FTS. Probably more I haven't listed?

It is not happening by March 1st 🤣

Remove 2/15? And maybe soon extend the market expiration?

@AndrewMeyer Done. Thanks for noticing