Resolves YES if there is a Starship-Superheavy launch on September 6th, 2023, in the local timezone at the launch site.
Resolves NO if there is a launch (after market creation) prior to that date, or if that date comes and goes without a launch.
"Launch" here means release of hold-down clamps following main engine ignition, even if the vehicle subsequently explodes or even was, unbeknownst to automation systems, already in the process of exploding when the command to release the clamps was given.
I'm using this definition because, in the event of an explosion, it seems likely easier to verify whether the hold-down clamps were released, than whether the vehicle lifted off the pad by some millimetres.
If it turns out this is a bad definition, I reserve the right to use a more sensible one to resolve the market in the spirit in which it is intended, or to resolve N/A if this isn't feasible.
1,000
3.00@ICRainbow This is the second one they issued, actually. The first one was for August 31. So it's not approximate per se, but its preliminary; it can change easily.
IIRC for last launch they issued one for late March initially, and then ended up launching somewhere in April.
Of course we're still waiting for other signs: FAA investigation results, FAA launch license, and the day before an overpressure notice.
@Mqrius Yep.
These schedules don't tend to advance, they tend to slip. Preliminary notices are best interpreted as NET dates, IMO.
@EvanDaniel I've only once seen a schedule advance compared to what was advertised, but that did happen to be SpaceX. (For the first flight test, there was some talk of doing another static fire first and then launch a week later, but then in the end the static fire was skipped to go straight to launch.)
Definitely NET 7 September. Perhaps more because
"STA is necessary to authorize Starship test flight 2 vehicle communications from the launch pad at Boca Chica TX, and ...
Requested Period of Operation
Operation Start Date:09/07/2023
Operation End Date:02/23/2024"
Unlikely to be as early as 7 September. I believe it can't be 6 September or earlier because I don't think there is enough time to get amendment to this FCC licence. (Unless that is already in progress, but in that case would this application have been withdrawn rather than made public?)