For this question, the start of reentry is defined as when Starship descends through 100km altitude, and the end of reentry is defined as when Starship descends through 25km altitude. (Main heating takes place between 65 and 35 km, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_entry)
If Starship explodes before descending through 100km altitude, resolves to "Explodes before reentry". If Starship explodes after that but before descending through 25km altitude, resolves to "Explodes during reentry". If it descends through 25km altitude without exploding, resolves "Survives reentry".
"Exploding" here will include any Rapid Unscheduled Disassembly of Starship (the upper stage). If the booster explodes by itself, that does not matter for this question.
If telemetry is lost and it can't be confirmed whether Starship descended through 25km intact, then it will be presumed that it did not. I.e. "Survives reentry" resolution requires confirmation that it was intact after descending through 25km altitude.
This question is about the next Starship mission with a planned trajectory that reaches space (100km altitude) - any low altitude test does not count for example. The close date is not a deadline and will be extended as necessary until the test occurs.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ6,539 | |
| 2 | Ṁ3,117 | |
| 3 | Ṁ1,563 | |
| 4 | Ṁ1,084 | |
| 5 | Ṁ767 |
"Without exploding" is what that meant, as per the previous sentences (sorry for any confusion)
If Starship explodes before descending through 100km altitude, resolves to "Explodes before reentry". If Starship explodes after that but before descending through 25km altitude, resolves to "Explodes during reentry".
@jack was this the type of question that could only resolve one answer? Because at times they didnt add up to 100% so I sorta thought if it didnt blow up but was all broken before 25 km both would resolve positive...
Anyway, all good, I didnt read carefully either...
@RobertoGomez Yes, mutually exclusive. Prices always add to 100%, if they didn't it was a bug or maybe a delay or something.
@SimonWestlake Yeah, your first comment was at 60km or so. It has now descended through 25km
@JuhoPennanen Is it? Isn't there some possibility that it gets past maximum re-entry heating with all systems functioning but with some damage that results in a RUD before re-entry is completed? Or is this possibility never going to be revealed because it will be in communication blackout due to plasma?
@ChristopherRandles I agree, the difference seems to be the case that startship survives the maximum heating AND there is a confirmation of that from telemetry or otherwise, but it still explodes above 25 km. I thought it seems unlikely, but I'm not really an expert. In addition I now notice that this question does not resolve for flights not reaching space at all, while the other would resolve negatively by a RUD between liftoff and reaching space. This should move the difference in probabilities in the other direction, so it seems to me the probabilities for 'surviving' should be pretty close. But in principle it's possible that this question resolves as "surviving" and the other question negatively, or the other as surviving and this as exploding.
"Primary goal is getting through max reentry heating."
Perhaps there should be an option for this?
@ChristopherRandles I deliberately chosen a lower altitude so we'd have a better chance of getting the telemetry back before that point. AFAIK we'd have a hard time telling if it blew up 2 minutes after max reentry heating, because it would likely still be in blackout. I also think surviving all of reentry is the most interesting question to me.
There is already https://manifold.markets/chrisjbillington/in-starshipsuperheavy-ift4-will-sta
What is this?
What is Manifold?
Are our predictions accurate?
Why use play money?
Why use play money?Related questions
What is this?
What is Manifold?
Are our predictions accurate?
Why use play money?
Why use play money?