Will Starship–SuperHeavy IFT-3 successfully perform an internal propellant transfer?
33
340
570
resolved Apr 26
Resolved
YES

In December 2023, NASA made statements that SpaceX would demonstrate an internal propellant transfer (transferring propellant between two internal tanks) in their next Starship–SuperHeavy flight:

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/05/spacex-plans-nasa-refueling-demonstration-for-next-starship-launch.html

This would be a demonstration of the kind of propellant transfer that would need to take place in orbit between vehicles as part of Starship's role in the upcoming Artemis missions to the moon.

Will Starship–SuperHeavy successfully perform such a demonstration during the third Integrated Flight Test?

Resolves YES on statements from SpaceX saying that this propellant transfer was attempted and was successful.

Resolves NO if a propellant transfer demonstration is described by SpaceX as unsuccessful, or if IFT-3 comes to an end (successfully or otherwise, including vehicle destruction on the pad) without a propellant transfer taking place.

Note specifically that if SpaceX launches the flight with no plans to do such a demonstration, this market still resolves NO, not N/A.

If the third flight isn't called "IFT-3", that's fine, this question is about the third Starship–SuperHeavy orbital or near-orbital flight, and will not resolve until a third flight has completed or the vehicle for a third flight attempt has been destroyed in an attempt (including blowing up on the pad as part of a launch attempt).

Get Ṁ200 play money

🏅 Top traders

#NameTotal profit
1Ṁ724
2Ṁ104
3Ṁ49
4Ṁ39
5Ṁ31
Sort by:
bought Ṁ1,000 YES
bought Ṁ2,174 YES

@Mqrius good enough for me

https://www.nasa.gov/directorates/esdmd/artemis-campaign-development-division/human-landing-system-program/nasa-artemis-mission-progresses-with-spacex-starship-test-flight/?utm_source=TWITTER&utm_medium=NASA_Marshall&utm_campaign=NASASocial&linkId=364006005

Not much new really:

"The propellant transfer demonstration operations were completed, and the NASA-SpaceX team is currently reviewing the flight data that was received."

This suggest "operations completed". It isn't clear to me whether "reviewing the flight data" is about the amount transferred or given the "flight" perhaps that is about what they can learn about settling fuels for efficient transfer pr something else.

This market seems high. But also I'm not sure if NASA would actually report it if there were minor issues.

Teams are reviewing flight data to learn how it went.

The demo happened, waiting for info from SpaceX regarding whether it was successful or not.

@chrisjbillington I think they said it was "complete", that sounds like successful to me but yeah

@Mqrius Yeah, though later they say "we at least sent the commands, now we'll have to look at the data". Sometimes a bit conflicting what we get on stream.

@chrisjbillington Yeah fair. We'll probably get info on this as it's part of a NASA contract.

Yes I think the computer being in state which indicates propellant transfer complete is a good sign but it might be wrongly in that state and the propellant transfer didn't happen. Not sure what further info might be revealed by data analysis.

bought Ṁ14 of NO

I swear these markets make me look like a SpaceX hater but I’m not! IFT 1+2 both fell way short of their stated goals even if they were successful. Between this market and the February launch market being at 50% I don’t understand the rationale.

Do we really expect Starship to go from not even orbital to in orbit propellant transfer in 3 months with a 30% chance?

bought Ṁ370 YES from 60% to 63%
bought Ṁ370 of YES

@NGK I get where you're coming from, but IFT-2 was very close to making it to its target trajectory, I think the likelihood of the next one making it is quite high. And I guess an internal propellant transfer doesn't sound that hard, provided they make it to their target trajectory. But that's my gut, certainly could be wrong.

predicted YES

@NGK as for the February date, I'm in two minds. SpaceX has an internal NET of Feb 12th, last I heard. Regulatory approval is simpler than last time, but we don't know when it will come. There are mutterings that it's expected in February.

Whilst that can't be banked on, I expect uncertainty in estimates about regulatory approval to be less than in the previous two launches, as it's no longer their first launch, they no longer need an environmental assessment, and the mishap investigation is likely more straightforward given that less went wrong in IFT-2 (and it went wrong more safely).

Normally betting on delays is a good bet, but things will become smoother the more launches they do, the number of possible sources of delays has already reduced and will continue to, until they start doing something different like using a different launch site or whatnot.

I had been leaning mostly toward March, but I am not confident enough to bet Feb below 50%.

predicted NO

My rationale is that so far SpaceX has generally pushed for some goal, fallen well short of it, but learned a lot along the way so that the next time they get it. So since this is the first time this has been announced, I think they aren't going to make it happen.

But I'll be excited to be wrong!

sold Ṁ3,150 of NO

Unresolved. Musk made statements in a recent talk suggesting a possible demonstration in the next flight. This contradicts the statements from the other day, so we'd better see what actually happens.

Some comments from Musk transcribed by @Mqrius here:

https://manifold.markets/Mqrius/will-starship-ift3-try-for-full-orb#89zzNsCOXEs4GKBrvztL

bought Ṁ30 of YES

@chrisjbillington Sounds like the statements earlier may have been misinterpreted by SpaceflightNow, thanks @Mqrius for pointing this out.

bought Ṁ300 of NO

Well that didn't last long, SpaceX says IFT-3 will not attempt such a demonstration. No point keeping this market open, resolving NO.