When will the first Starship reach orbit?

[QuantumG]

Well, Elon threw us a curve ball will the big reveal poll but I think we're well situated to make our guesses when for Starship will reach orbit. So have at it.

[daedalus1]

I haven't seen any signs of a first stage yet. That has to be built first.

[Galactic Penguin SST]

After adjusting for Elon Time Dilation Constant (TM) I'm voting for May 2021 or later, maybe around 2022, with the whole system not flying till 2024 and the first trial run with people NET 2026. 

[FutureSpaceTourist]

I’m feeling optimistic so went with April 2021. An Elon time dilation factor of about 1.5?

Mk 1 20 km flight I think will be late Q1 2020. I can imagine a Mk 2 / Mk 3 higher flight in Q3 / Q4. Construction of SH in 2nd half of 2020, with SS + SH integrated testing in Q1 2021 and orbital flight in April 2021.

So I’m being wildly optimistic & assuming first orbital attempt succeeds (at least in getting to orbit, not so sure about recovering SS successfully)

[Dalhousie]

Options should be years, not months.

[high road]

Options should be years, not months.

Or quarters.

That crazy flip before landing seems like a recipe for desaster. I think they're going to install those hot gas thrusters before attempting orbit. And probably lots of other 'little' details as they encounter them. That adds some delay, so my guess is q1 2021.

[QuantumG]

Options should be years, not months.

It's an annual poll. Think yaself lucky I bust it out to 18 months. 😂

[whitelancer64]

Had a burst of optimism and voted Nov. 2020. Realist me thinks early 2021 is more likely, though.

Wild bet: SLS and Starship launching with 50 days of eachother...

*edit*
Wilder bet: New Glenn, Vulcan, SLS, and Starship all launch within 180 days of eachother.

[QuantumG]

https://twitter.com/HarryStoltz1/status/1186751160008359936

Gwynne time.

[meberbs]

I went conservative with a full factor of 2 for Musk time dilation and picked September 2020, my gut wanted me to go 1 month earlier. I am not sure how people are considering later dates than that as optimistic. We can see the start of building the next gen of Starships that are intended to go into orbit, and infrastructure to increase build rate and capacity. We should see the Super Heavy builds start Q1 2020 while they put the finishing touches on mk3 and mk 4. Enough time to be done by late summer, with some margin for pre launch tests. This timeline is still conservative depending on how much lessons learned and existing infrastructure speeds future builds. And the 2 parallel builds mitigates a lot of "what if something goes wrong."

[c4fusion]

I am not sure why everyone thinks it so hard for SpaceX to get to space to be honest. They have already shown they can get to orbit with their falcon 9 on their first try with a craft far more complex than the falcon 1.  But now they have far more experience with launching rockets to space.  Now as for actually landing the second stage and getting through reentry that's a total different problem.  Also last point to note is that SpaceX may fail to land mk 1 and mk 2 and elect to push for launch to orbit in the meantime to learn more about the heat shields and handling in the hypersonic regime.

Originally before the Boca reveal, I was thinking about end of 2020, but now I think it might be around July 2020.

[Nomadd]

 If a Starship launches to the east from Boca Chica and lands 300 feet to the west of the launchpad 90 minutes later, will people say it wasn't a full orbit?

[Galactic Penguin SST]

If a Starship launches to the east from Boca Chica and lands 300 feet to the west of the launchpad 90 minutes later, will people say it wasn't a full orbit?

That's more than Yuri Gagarin's flight....

[high road]

I am not sure why everyone thinks it so hard for SpaceX to get to space to be honest. They have already shown they can get to orbit with their falcon 9 on their first try with a craft far more complex than the falcon 1.  But now they have far more experience with launching rockets to space.  Now as for actually landing the second stage and getting through reentry that's a total different problem.  Also last point to note is that SpaceX may fail to land mk 1 and mk 2 and elect to push for launch to orbit in the meantime to learn more about the heat shields and handling in the hypersonic regime.

Originally before the Boca reveal, I was thinking about end of 2020, but now I think it might be around July 2020.

Falcon 9 was expendable. The point of Starship is that it's reusable. They have plenty of experience getting to orbit. I don't see the benefit of getting Starship to orbit, without maximizing the chance of it surviving reentry/landing intact enough to learn all they can from it. Which doesn't mean it absolutely has to survive, only that it needs to stand as big of a chance as is considered reasonable by SpaceX standards.

Working out F9 reusability had the benefit that every launch was paid for. Starship won't have that advantage. Even if they would launch paying customers on Starship test flights, each Starship is far more expensive than an F9. You don't throw it away intentionally if you can avoid it economically. Although by writing this, I now realize there's a grey area where it might make sense to launch whatever you build, as you don't learn anything by not launching them either.

[mmeijeri]

They have plenty of experience getting to orbit. I don't see the benefit of getting Starship to orbit, without maximizing the chance of it surviving reentry/landing intact enough to learn all they can from it.

That is true, but it doesn't have to reach orbit with a lot of payload. Mk3 and Mk4 can still afford to be overbuilt.

[envy887]

If a Starship launches to the east from Boca Chica and lands 300 feet to the west of the launchpad 90 minutes later, will people say it wasn't a full orbit?

Orbit is an energy state, not a distance traveled. If you reach an orbital altitude and velocity vector then deorbit and land after less than one revolution, it still counts as reaching orbit.

[whitelancer64]

I am not sure why everyone thinks it so hard for SpaceX to get to space to be honest. They have already shown they can get to orbit with their falcon 9 on their first try with a craft far more complex than the falcon 1.  But now they have far more experience with launching rockets to space.  Now as for actually landing the second stage and getting through reentry that's a total different problem.  Also last point to note is that SpaceX may fail to land mk 1 and mk 2 and elect to push for launch to orbit in the meantime to learn more about the heat shields and handling in the hypersonic regime.

Originally before the Boca reveal, I was thinking about end of 2020, but now I think it might be around July 2020.

I don't think anyone's doubting the ability of SpaceX to put Starship into orbit, just the timing of when they'll be ready to do that.

[Hog]

If a Starship launches to the east from Boca Chica and lands 300 feet to the west of the launchpad 90 minutes later, will people say it wasn't a full orbit?

This threads title is "When will the first Starship reach orbit?"  "Reach orbit" assumes attaining orbital velocities.
Reaching orbital velocities and then slowing for entry/landing would satisfy most criteria for reaching orbit.  You don't have to "make one complete circumnavigation of the Earth" IOW a Starship doesn't have to make a full orbit of the Earth in order for it to "reach orbit" or "be on-orbit". 

The actual distance traveled while "on orbit" is almost inconsequential when compared to the positive/negative accelerations required for attaining orbital velocities and then slowing again for entry. That immense amount of kinetic energy that the spacecraft has acquired during launch must be dealt with during entry, mostly as heating due to the compression of the atmosphere ahead of the direction of travel.
 On orbit operations are considered "safer" than Launch ops or Entry ops.

All of this logical discussion aside, I'm sure though that there will be handwavers that would say "Oh, it's not an orbital space vehicle because it was a FULL 300 feet short of a complete orbit of the Earth." lol

[laszlo]

Now who's moving the goalposts?

[meberbs]

If a Starship launches to the east from Boca Chica and lands 300 feet to the west of the launchpad 90 minutes later, will people say it wasn't a full orbit?

Due to the rotation of the Earth, at Boca Chica latitude, it will end up 2200 km west after 1 full circle. I don't think there should be any complaints if it continues east for 2200 km more to get back to within a few hundred feet of the launch site.

[pochimax]

First of all somebody must set what everybody will accept as "Starship".

Second, the meaning of "orbit".

Third, if the fly is expendable or not (succesful landing).

Fourth, if that Starship must be reusable or not.

I see a lot of confussion about what really qualifies as a true orbital flight of a true Starship. Impossible to bet any date.

For me, a "true Starship" must go to orbit and safely land from a mach 25 reentry.

NET than 2027, in this case.

[DistantTemple]

July 2020, Probably 12th of July... a week late on an independence day event I imagine he might hold!
The SS doesn't have to land at all! it can stay in orbit for the time being. However I don't think landing is a big problem. The beautiful swooping change of direction can be done at a higher altitude at the expense of more fuel, and be tweaked to optimum pad-skimming lowness later!
Tesla has just started to do some things AHEAD of schedule! Will we see the Elon time factor slide from 1.5 to 0.9???
Also since the payload is 150Tonnes, SX still have all that to play with in over engineering prototype parts. July 5th 2020 just needs 10 or 20 tonnes payload for a fantastic gimmick, such as a TESLA Semi! ....
I think we will see a more conventional manufacturing facility spring up at Roberts road. And the currently invisible Super Heavy will hatch quickly, and be successful at first flight, having learned all its lessons from the SS development.

The achievement is the technical term orbit with a prototype SS.

[envy887]

First of all somebody must set what everybody will accept as "Starship".

Second, the meaning of "orbit".

Third, if the fly is expendable or not (succesful landing).

Fourth, if that Starship must be reusable or not.

I see a lot of confussion about what really qualifies as a true orbital flight of a true Starship. Impossible to bet any date.

For me, a "true Starship" must go to orbit and safely land from a mach 25 reentry.

NET than 2027, in this case.

The OP didn't say anything about landing, so you are answering a different poll.

As for what counts as Starship, I think most people would accept anything that's 9 meter main diameter, mostly stainless steel, and Raptor powered. There are several Starship variants (Crew, Tanker, Chomper, Starkicker) planned, but all share those features.

[pochimax]

Ok, first prototype to orbit... NET May 2021. Probably 2022.

[mmeijeri]

The OP didn't say anything about landing, so you are answering a different poll.

Do you think the first Starship to reach orbit will fail to make a successful landing? I'd expect them to try a landing on the first orbital flight, because the heatshield will be the biggest remaining unknown factor after they've got the 20km flight to land successfully.

[su27k]

If a Starship launches to the east from Boca Chica and lands 300 feet to the west of the launchpad 90 minutes later, will people say it wasn't a full orbit?

Due to the rotation of the Earth, at Boca Chica latitude, it will end up 2200 km west after 1 full circle. I don't think there should be any complaints if it continues east for 2200 km more to get back to within a few hundred feet of the launch site.

Actually didn't Elon say it lacks the cross range for one orbit mission? It needs to wait for a few orbits for the launch site to get back under it, so the less than one orbit scenario won't happen, at least not in a nominal mission.

[meberbs]

If a Starship launches to the east from Boca Chica and lands 300 feet to the west of the launchpad 90 minutes later, will people say it wasn't a full orbit?

Due to the rotation of the Earth, at Boca Chica latitude, it will end up 2200 km west after 1 full circle. I don't think there should be any complaints if it continues east for 2200 km more to get back to within a few hundred feet of the launch site.

Actually didn't Elon say it lacks the cross range for one orbit mission? It needs to wait for a few orbits for the launch site to get back under it, so the less than one orbit scenario won't happen, at least not in a nominal mission.

It depends on the orbit they go into. For simplistic trajectories, a due eat launch means you have to wait a whole day, only one point of the orbit touches the launch site latitude. If the orbit is more inclined you get 2 chances, one ascending, and one descending. If you start by launching southeast, you have to wait more than half a day. The same inclination but northeast (from Florida, since Boca Chica can't go that direction) would be less than half a day. With just the right inclination and a northeast launch, no crossrange would be required.

This ignores the fact that it takes time to get to orbit, and that dogleg trajectories can mess it up even more. There is a nonzero chance that I somehow got everything inside out. There is a very high chance that this is an over-analysis of my original over-analysis of what I believe was mostly a joke. A new thread would probably be a more appropriate location to continue this if desired.

[daedalus1]

If a Starship launches to the east from Boca Chica and lands 300 feet to the west of the launchpad 90 minutes later, will people say it wasn't a full orbit?

Due to the rotation of the Earth, at Boca Chica latitude, it will end up 2200 km west after 1 full circle. I don't think there should be any complaints if it continues east for 2200 km more to get back to within a few hundred feet of the launch site.

Actually didn't Elon say it lacks the cross range for one orbit mission? It needs to wait for a few orbits for the launch site to get back under it, so the less than one orbit scenario won't happen, at least not in a nominal mission.

If that's the case (not enough cross range for one orbit return) then it needs to wait 24 hours, one full rotation of the earth.

[Patchouli]

I'm going with April 2021 as I don't think they would even attempt getting into orbit until Super Heavy is finished.
In theory it could be a SSTO but only with practically no payload which probably also means completely stripped down.
Most of the TPS tests could be done simply reaching Mercury Redstone speeds.
Trying to make it act like a SSTO for a publicity stunt would be a waste of time and money that would divert funding away from the booster.
Plus got to remember Elon time he's always a little optimistic on the schedules.
This first orbital flight probably won't be a crewed version but the tanker and cargo variant.

[daedalus1]

I'm going with April 2021 as I don't think they would even attempt getting into orbit until Super Heavy is finished.
In theory it could be a SSTO but only with practically no payload which probably also means completely stripped down.
Most of the TPS tests could be done simply reaching Mercury Redstone speeds.
Trying to make it act like a SSTO for a publicity stunt would be a waste of time and money that would divert funding away from the booster.
Plus got to remember Elon time he's always a little optimistic on the schedules.
This first orbital flight probably won't be a crewed version but the tanker and cargo variant.

You would have to put on more than the announced six engines to launch fully fueled. I doubt very much that it could reach orbit with less than a full fuel load. So is impossible even with an empty cargo hold.

[Bubbinski]

I’m gonna say the very end of 2020 (a week or 2 before Christmas). They’re making astonishing progress but still need to finish building the Super Heavy. Gwynne said within a year, but I’m going to say they’ll need a little more time than that, just because it’s a new undertaking. (I don’t recall ever observing a new crewed spacecraft or rocket being on time from initial projections).

[TripleSeven]

2024 maybe

[c4fusion]

I’m gonna say the very end of 2020 (a week or 2 before Christmas). They’re making astonishing progress but still need to finish building the Super Heavy. Gwynne said within a year, but I’m going to say they’ll need a little more time than that, just because it’s a new undertaking. (I don’t recall ever observing a new crewed spacecraft or rocket being on time from initial projections).

While I am thinking of pushing my guess back to October 2020 from June 2020, I don't think the flight to orbit is going to be delayed because starship has a crewed version.  The version that is going up is going to be closer to a beta if not alpha test of the cargo version.

2024 maybe

This was the sort of pessimism/irrationality I was really thinking about. If you are going to put a date that far out, you might as well say that it's not going to fly ever and SpaceX should close its doors (I would accept that answer for more readily).  First of all we are not talking about a company that has never been to space at this point. And second of all, in order for it to be that long of a timeframe, spacex would have to blown up so many times on the way up to orbit that it would not be funny.  And if you are thinking of Falcon Heavy delay, it still doesn't make sense as Falcon Heavy became increasingly redundant throughout its development while Starship is a *potential* game changer for SpaceX.

Working out F9 reusability had the benefit that every launch was paid for. Starship won't have that advantage. Even if they would launch paying customers on Starship test flights, each Starship is far more expensive than an F9. You don't throw it away intentionally if you can avoid it economically. Although by writing this, I now realize there's a grey area where it might make sense to launch whatever you build, as you don't learn anything by not launching them either.

What I was trying to get at is that they would still have a lot of extra data about the hypersonic regime and heat shielding that the 20 km test does not provide.  Also the problem with additional 20 km tests is that they don't provide that much more additional data without really changing the risk profile that much.  If one of the prototype blows up, I am going to wager that it is either A: it  blew up basically on the launch stand or B: it couldn't right itself correctly and went smack into the earth, which is the same for either of the tests.

[philw1776]

My optimistic guestimate was December 2020.  Reasoning being that SpaceX likes to move aggressively without achieving implementation perfection before taking flight action.  They'll fly a SH ASAP.  And a SH with depleted # of engines, say 21 or whatever, is enough to launch a Starship into LEO.  That early SH should be available 2nd half of 2020.  Light the candle.

[Tass]

Now who's moving the goalposts?

I really don't know, since I can't even tell who you are addressing, nor which way the goal posts are supposedly being moved.

[shm6666]

I´m not entirely convinced about Elons monolithic Starship that will land on moon and mars. There was a reason why von Braun went for the Apollo solution. Also, at the time of writing MK3 will have to be built and tested to fly to 20km. That puts them at best to June 2020 for that. At worse Jan of 2021 or even later if they get a MK1 trouble again. But I think they will pull the plug on this earlier.

My biggest problem with Starship is that is based of a dream of having a ship like the Tintin:s Destination moon ship. Where’s Falcon 9 is based on science facts.

I think we will see a radical redesign again, so in this incarnation. Starship will never reach orbit…

[daedalus1]

My biggest problem with Starship is that is based of a dream of having a ship like the Tintin:s Destination moon ship. Where’s Falcon 9 is based on science facts.

Can you please explain more of what part of Starship is not science fact.

[ChrisWilson68]

There was a reason why von Braun went for the Apollo solution.

That choice was for a particular goal in a particular situation.  Von Braun most certainly thought the right choice for the future beyond Apollo was much different from Apollo -- in fact, much more like the SpaceX Starship design than Apollo.

https://www.wired.com/2014/09/wernher-von-brauns-fantastic-vision-ferry-rocket/

[su27k]

My biggest problem with Starship is that is based of a dream of having a ship like the Tintin:s Destination moon ship. Where’s Falcon 9 is based on science facts.

No, Starship is nothing like the Tintin rocket. It had some superficial resemblance on the outside in the past, but even that was removed in the latest design iteration.

In terms of basic design such as propulsion and staging, Starship is completely different. The Tintin rocket is a nuclear single stage to the Moon and back, while Starship is a methalox two stage to orbit, and can only go beyond LEO with orbital refueling. We do have advanced concepts like the Tintin rocket, for example John Bucknell's Air Enhanced Nuclear Thermal Rocket, but that's no where near what Starship is.

BTW, even John Bucknell's concept is based on science (or more accurately, it's based on known aerospace and nuclear engineering principles), it's not science fiction.

[high road]

There was a reason why von Braun went for the Apollo solution.

To get there quickly and within budget. And it took massive convincing. All of his ideas for space exploration use much larger rockets.

[QuantumG]

All of his ideas for space exploration use much larger rockets.

and full reusability, and in-space refuelling.

[Rocket Science]

May 2021 or later whichever "type of orbit" you feel to choose...

[David willis]

SLS has two rockets worth of lunar hardware, while starship has zero orbital hardware at all, its kinda silly in my mind for anyone to think starship can beat SLS to orbit

[freddo411]

SLS has two rockets worth of lunar hardware, while starship has zero orbital hardware at all, its kinda silly in my mind for anyone to think starship can beat SLS to orbit

OK.

But, there is a list of things that SLS hasn't done yet.   

The most relavent is "fly".   A starship related prototype has flown. 

SLS has never had fuel in it's tanks, or plumbing; SS prototypes have.

SLS avionics have never flown; SS prototypes have.


Yes, SLS has a substantial head start, a substantial lead at this point and substantially more resources.   Any reasonably urgent program would certainly get flying to orbit before SS. ....

Nevertheless, I would not be AT ALL surprised if SX roughly assembles SN1 or SN2 and flies to 100 km before Artemis 1 does.   There's an outside shot it will make orbit first too.

By the end of 2021, SS will have flown more orbital flights than SLS ever will

[Dalhousie]

We have not seen any prototypes for SS.  Just test beds.  One failed the first test. 

[meberbs]

We have not seen any prototypes for SS.  Just test beds.  One failed the first test.

Then you don't know the meaning of the word prototype.

Hopper was a prototype. Mk1 and Mk2 were prototypes, but it was decided they weren't worth flying, better to move on to the next one in line as they had already served to teach lessons (most of which the public won't know because it would be proprietary data).

[meberbs]

SLS has two rockets worth of lunar hardware, while starship has zero orbital hardware at all, its kinda silly in my mind for anyone to think starship can beat SLS to orbit

SLS is progressing at an unbelievably, incomprehensibly, slow pace. The silly thing here is the claim that the more than a year timeframe before SLS might be ready to fly has any relevance whatsoever to the timeframe to flight or SPaceX's rocket where they already demonstrated an ability to build it from scratch in a few months, while initially experimenting with build processes. Given the existing infrastructure, lessons learned, etc future builds should be faster.

[jadebenn]

I haven't seen the aforementioned "faster progression." I personally feel the Starship program as of current has been wasting its time solving issues that were already solved ages ago.

SpaceX knows how to build tanks that don't explode at flight pressures, and they sure as heck know how to propulsively land rockets. Those shiny steel fliers may be visually impressive, but there really doesn't seem to be much engineering rationale to them. There are a million other ways the things they're testing could've been verified with must less time and effort.

Like I said, they haven't exactly been testing any of the aspects Starship will be on the cutting edge of technology with yet. Pressure vessels and propulsive landings should be the easy parts. Yet here we are, a year later, and the program is barely any better off than it was at the beginning of 2019.

[su27k]

I haven't seen the aforementioned "faster progression." I personally feel the Starship program as of current has been wasting its time solving issues that were already solved ages ago.

SpaceX knows how to build tanks that don't explode at flight pressures, and they sure as heck know how to propulsively land rockets. Those shiny steel fliers may be visually impressive, but there really doesn't seem to be much engineering rationale to them. There are a million other ways the things they're testing could've been verified with must less time and effort.

Like I said, they haven't exactly been testing any of the aspects Starship will be on the cutting edge of technology with yet. Pressure vessels and propulsive landings should be the easy parts. Yet here we are, a year later, and the program is barely any better off than it was at the beginning of 2019.

If building tanks is the easy part, why did NASA give Boeing $6.2B, the largest SLS contract by 2x, to build the two SLS core stage tanks?

Whatever system that is on the SLS core stage, be it avionics or thrust structure or pipes/wires, they exist on those shiny steel fliers too. Except SpaceX built these shiny steel fliers in a few months, Boeing spent 8 years building the two SLS core stages (still not finished yet).

[jadebenn]

Consciously or not, you're engaging in whataboutism.

You want to complain about SLS? Take it to space policy. It does not change my point about Starship's timelines so far.

[su27k]

Consciously or not, you're engaging in whataboutism.

You want to complain about SLS? Take it to space policy. It does not change my point about Starship's timelines so far.

No, this is not a complain about SLS, this is using SLS as an example to show your assumption that tank is the easy part to build is wrong. Your point about timeline is also off give how long it took Boeing to build the SLS tank, comparing to Boeing's work on SLS, SpaceX has been remarkably fast.

[envy887]

I haven't seen the aforementioned "faster progression." I personally feel the Starship program as of current has been wasting its time solving issues that were already solved ages ago.

SpaceX knows how to build tanks that don't explode at flight pressures, and they sure as heck know how to propulsively land rockets. Those shiny steel fliers may be visually impressive, but there really doesn't seem to be much engineering rationale to them. There are a million other ways the things they're testing could've been verified with must less time and effort.

Like I said, they haven't exactly been testing any of the aspects Starship will be on the cutting edge of technology with yet. Pressure vessels and propulsive landings should be the easy parts. Yet here we are, a year later, and the program is barely any better off than it was at the beginning of 2019.

Building low cost flight weight tanks at this scale is not, and has never been, "solved". There are only 4 comparable tank designs ever built: The S-IC, the S-II, and the Energia and SLS core stages. I would argue that none of them were remotely in the cost range SpaceX needs to hit for Starship, judging by the "too expensive to fly and thus cancelled" status of the first 3, and the very high costs to date for SLS.

[envy887]

SLS has two rockets worth of lunar hardware, while starship has zero orbital hardware at all, its kinda silly in my mind for anyone to think starship can beat SLS to orbit

I'm fairly sure that some already existing hardware will reach orbit on Starship. Largely because SpaceX is going to recycle existing parts and use off-the-shelf components wherever they can, but also because they have already built almost 2 dozen Raptors and at least some of them are likely capable of an orbital flight.

What SpaceX doesn't yet have are the major structural components. Which they are betting they can crank out pretty quick, but we'll see...

[envy887]

Well at least we know how Elon would vote in this poll

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1230642008257069056

[jongoff]

Well at least we know how Elon would vote in this poll

https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1230642008257069056

It's interesting to note, that in the 4 months since this poll came out, ~50% of voters are now more optimistic than Elon is today... Admittedly this was only a few weeks after Elon had claimed he was six months out from an orbital flight. But it is kind of interesting to see how this evolves over time.

~Jon

[envy887]

Well at least we know how Elon would vote in this poll

It's interesting to note, that in the 4 months since this poll came out, ~50% of voters are now more optimistic than Elon is today... Admittedly this was only a few weeks after Elon had claimed he was six months out from an orbital flight. But it is kind of interesting to see how this evolves over time.

~Jon

It's also worth nothing that this poll only references reaching orbit, while Musk wants to go right for full reuse which is considerably more challenging. I wonder if that will change. If they are cranking out Starships like sausages then going for partial reuse first has a lot of potential value for getting customer buy-in, while having rather little downside.

FWIW, I voted January 2021 in this poll. I still think that's a reasonable date after accounting for a possible partial reuse orbital attempt. 

[jongoff]

Well at least we know how Elon would vote in this poll

It's interesting to note, that in the 4 months since this poll came out, ~50% of voters are now more optimistic than Elon is today... Admittedly this was only a few weeks after Elon had claimed he was six months out from an orbital flight. But it is kind of interesting to see how this evolves over time.

~Jon

It's also worth nothing that this poll only references reaching orbit, while Musk wants to go right for full reuse which is considerably more challenging. I wonder if that will change. If they are cranking out Starships like sausages then going for partial reuse first has a lot of potential value for getting customer buy-in, while having rather little downside.

FWIW, I voted January 2021 in this poll. I still think that's a reasonable date after accounting for a possible partial reuse orbital attempt. 

I voted May 2021 or later, and am still feeling pretty good about it.

~Jon

[ZChris13]

Well at least we know how Elon would vote in this poll

It's interesting to note, that in the 4 months since this poll came out, ~50% of voters are now more optimistic than Elon is today... Admittedly this was only a few weeks after Elon had claimed he was six months out from an orbital flight. But it is kind of interesting to see how this evolves over time.

~Jon

It's also worth nothing that this poll only references reaching orbit, while Musk wants to go right for full reuse which is considerably more challenging. I wonder if that will change. If they are cranking out Starships like sausages then going for partial reuse first has a lot of potential value for getting customer buy-in, while having rather little downside.

FWIW, I voted January 2021 in this poll. I still think that's a reasonable date after accounting for a possible partial reuse orbital attempt.

If you permit me to attempt some interpretation of Elon here, I believe what he means is that he won't launch to orbit unless he thinks he can also attempt recovery.
It's only a short jump from full recovery to full reuse.

EDIT: I voted July 2020, because it's my birthday. That's probably a little bit optimistic now.

[high road]

SLS has two rockets worth of lunar hardware, while starship has zero orbital hardware at all, its kinda silly in my mind for anyone to think starship can beat SLS to orbit

Do you still think it's silly? SLS is now NET april 2021. Both are likely to slip, but it seems to me that SLS is slipping faster

[wannamoonbase]

I would not be so bold as to predict which month.  However, I am willing to predict the second half of 2021.

We need to see control surfaces, heat shield and super heavy and also some very series ground support equipment to handle a vehicle and some wicked large cryogenic storage for the CH4 and LOx.  Bigly water deluge system too.

We should start seeing that ground system work in the second half of 2020.

[oldAtlas_Eguy]

The key indicator of when is when we see the first East Coast SS build starting in a new manufacturing infrastructure that is in easy transport to 39A. Last build location is a difficult and expensive trip for a vehicle and is likely a non-capable for a taller SH. Infrastructure build up at a manufacturing site closer to the pad is the first but SS or SH build start would be the best indicator since existing timelines for builds in Boca Chica would give good estimates on when a finished vehicle would head for the pad for the first testing at 39A.

[FutureSpaceTourist]

Elon’s current thinking:

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1317229714025623553

Elon Musk at @TheMarsSociety 2020:

"I'm 80% to 90% confident" SpaceX's Starship will reach orbit within the next year. "Probably 50% or 60% confident that we'll be able to bring the shuttle booster back" and land.

[QuantumG]

Options should be years, not months.

It's an annual poll. Think yaself lucky I bust it out to 18 months. 😂

Almost time to re-poll.

[armchairfan]

Elon’s current thinking:

https://twitter.com/thesheetztweetz/status/1317229714025623553

Elon Musk at @TheMarsSociety 2020:

"I'm 80% to 90% confident" SpaceX's Starship will reach orbit within the next year. "Probably 50% or 60% confident that we'll be able to bring the shuttle booster back" and land.

My emphasis.
That's not quite* what Elon said. Getting the booster back isn't the hard part ... getting the ship back from orbit is. Beginning at 49:10

I'd say that I'm 80 to 90% confident that we will reach orbit with starship next year. I think probably 50 or 60%  ... 50% confident that we'll be able to bring the ship* and booster back. That's more of a dicey situation. We'll probably lose a few ships* before we really get the atmospheric return and landing right. Hopefully we don't lose any boosters because that's a lot of engines. Our initial booster flights will just have maybe two to four engines; not 28. Twenty eight is a lot of engines. I think we'll probably be doing high volume flights probably in 2022, so a couple of years from now.

Reading between the lines, it's pretty clear that the initial booster flights will be without a starship stacked on top. (That was a topic of debate a while back.)

Just think, a year(ish) from now starship will probably make it to orbit. Even if they don't quickly perfect recovery of the upper stage, they may still have one of the lower cost launch vehicles around simply because of their efforts to mass produce them. Even now they can crank out a new starship every one to two months. Even faster for airframes. Engine availability seems to be the current constraining factor and they're getting closer to dialing that in. IIRC, they're up to around to around Raptor SN 40 with SN 50 being around the point where Elon previously thought that they'd be happy enough with the design to up the production rate.

* The fact that "Starship" officially can mean either the upper stage or the entire stack continues to cause confusion. However, I think that Elon was using ship here to mean only the upper stage since he also explicitly mentioned the booster when appropriate.

[Zed_Noir]

<snip>
Reading between the lines, it's pretty clear that the initial booster flights will be without a starship stacked on top.
<snip>

Maybe with a double or triple height mass simulator hat. At least for the initial low altitude Super Heavy hops. 

[QuantumG]

New poll posted!

https://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=52134.0

[Negan]

Reading between the lines, it's pretty clear that the initial booster flights will be without a starship stacked on top. (That was a topic of debate a while back.)

I didn't know they could test a booster with only 2 to 4 engines. That's pretty cool.

[eeergo]

Bump for the conclusion of the follow-up poll (2021/22).

As usual, I advocate for some reflection upon what stakes Starship is raising, how much hinges upon it, and what it is delivering.