How far will the 4th Starship test get before exploding?
➕
Plus
47
Ṁ66k
resolved Jun 6
Resolved
YES
Clears the launch tower
Resolved
YES
Max Q
Resolved
YES
Booster most engines cut off (MECO)
Resolved
YES
Second stage engine start (SES)
Resolved
YES
Stage separation
Resolved
YES
Booster boostback burn startup
Resolved
YES
Booster boostback burn shutdown
Resolved
YES
Booster landing burn startup
Resolved
YES
Booster touchdown (hard or soft)
Resolved
YES
Second stage engine cutoff (SECO)
Resolved
YES
Second stage touchdown (hard or soft)
Resolved
YES
Second stage landing burn startup (at least 1/2 lit successfully)

Each option resolves YES if the next (4th) Starship full stack flight test completes that milestone without exploding, NO otherwise (i.e. if it explodes during or before completing that milestone).

See the flight plan at https://www.spacex.com/launches/mission/?missionId=starship-flight-4

Examples and more detailed definitions:

  • This question refers to the next Starship full stack flight test which has a planned trajectory that reaches space (100km altitude). So a 10km altitude flight test does not count.

  • "Exploding" here will include any Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly

  • The second stage and stage separation milestones only require the second stage not to explode. Similarly, the booster boostback/landing milestones only require the booster not to explode.

  • If Starship reaches MaxQ but explodes 2 seconds later, MaxQ still resolves YES.

  • MECO/SECO are defined as when the engines are intentionally shut down - if the engines shutdown unintentionally that doesn't count.

  • If MECO is attempted but the engines fail to shut down, and the rocket explodes before they can successfully shut down, MECO resolves NO.

  • Note that Starship will be doing a hot staging - they will cut off most but not all of the booster engines, ignite the second stage engines, and then the stages separate. This is different from most other rockets!

  • Note that the planned MECO will have most engines cut off, not all.

  • Second stage engine start (SES) does not require stage separation to complete successfully, as long as the engines ignite successfully. At least half the engines must ignite to count as a success.

  • Similarly, for each of the burn startup milestones, at least half the engines that are supposed to ignite must ignite to count as a success.

  • For stage separation, if the second stage separates intact, that's a YES (even if e.g. the rocket starts spinning unrecoverably out of control, as long as it stays intact). If the engines light but the second stage explodes instead of separating, that's a NO. If the stages separate unintentionally, that's a NO.

  • Second stage touchdown resolves YES if Starship touches down anywhere in the planned ocean or continent (currently planned for the Indian ocean), and is intact at the moment it hits the surface, even if it is an uncontrolled crash. If it touches down elsewhere, that's a NO.

  • Similarly for booster touchdown, resolves YES if the booster (separated from the second stage) touches down anywhere in the planned ocean or continent and is intact at the moment it hits the surface.

  • The close date is not a deadline and will be extended as necessary until the test occurs.

Previous market for IFT3: https://manifold.markets/jack/how-far-will-the-3rd-starship-test

Get
Ṁ1,000
and
S3.00
Sort by:

@Mqrius Awesome thanks!

This was incredible to watch

That was much more successful than I expected!

Reminder:

for each of the burn startup milestones, at least half the engines that are supposed to ignite must ignite to count as a success.

So we still are waiting on confirmation on number of engines that lit

bought Ṁ5 NO

Pretty sure it hit the water without any RUD. Any confirmation yet?

sold Ṁ99 YES

Damn

bought Ṁ1,459 YES

Wow, this was a rollercoaster

opened a Ṁ10 YES at 1.0% order

They called out landing burn, but the engines didn't light up on the telemetry display

bought Ṁ250 YES

@jack Saw light tho

bought Ṁ10 NO

@Mqrius Yeah, they're saying it did happen. Will wait for more info.

@jack They say it did the landing burn, and it slowed down below terminal velocity, so it must've happened

bought Ṁ1 NO

@Mqrius Yep.

Just a reminder

Similarly, for each of the burn startup milestones, at least half the engines that are supposed to ignite must ignite to count as a success.

So we still are waiting on confirmation on number of engines that lit

@jack Isn't landing expected to be 2? So if any lit that's half?

@robm Yeah I don't think it can land on a single engine anyway, didn't one of the 10km hops fail because of that? So the fact that it landed softly seems confirmation to me

@robm Oh, it was supposed to be 2? I thought it was 3 but maybe I imagined that.

@jack afaik they light 3 and then immediately shut one down, just for redundancy reasons. They decided that after one of the 10km hops, where they tried to light 2 and one failed, and Elon responded with "we should've tried to light 3, this was our mistake in procedure". So they light 3, and the 2 best ones keep going for the flip and burn

Ok, thanks. Will continue waiting for confirmation but it does sound like it will be a YES. For future markets I will revise the criteria for the landing burn slightly to account for that.

@jack This is pretty convincing

bought Ṁ10 NO

For reentry, see

Related questions

© Manifold Markets, Inc.Terms + Mana-only TermsPrivacyRules