@YaakovSaxon should resolve to NO

@zaphod Agreed, thankfully the resolution is very clear in this case!

(FWIW I haven’t been ignoring this market entirely. I’ve been lurking and mostly following the discussion. But every time I tried to collect my thoughts to announce an official clear cut interpretation, I realized I didn’t have one. Fundamentally the error was my own in not understanding the length of the Mars launch window to be more than a couple weeks long. So despite [or even because of] my efforts to be clear, the question as worded was ambiguous/contradictory for some possible outcomes. Thankfully events ended up resolving it pretty cleanly)

If ESCAPADE does not launch for other reasons but New Glenn is very clearly otherwise ready and not the cause of the delay then it will also resolve YES

IMO we need more info before this resolves NO. Did NASA delay the mission because of New Glenn, or was it a payload readiness thing?

@MattP I agree. However, this article by Eric Berger (article) points the finger at New Glenn.

Given that BO hasn't done a wet dress rehersal yet (they're still static firing stages separately), I think it's pretty clear the window is being missed by BO.

@DanHomerick fair enough, Berger's a highly reliable source in this arena. That article would be sufficient to me for NO resolution if I were the question resolver.

@MattP I guess it's also telling that New Glenn will now launch in November instead. I guess you could blame that on the payload too but I'm not so sure.

@MattP New Glenn won't be ready in time. AFAIK the payloads will be / would have been.

@EvanDaniel you're so fast 😭

@Mqrius Usually you beat me to them...

@YaakovSaxon feel free to declare otherwise if you're around, but I've extended trading until end of Oct.

That's a tight launch window:

Would the recent No voters agree that an October launch still counts as Yes for this market? It's the same transfer window, and the description emphasizes that it's the window that counts, not the month of August. I'm confused by the low percentages.

@EvanDaniel @notarealuser

they are targeting 29 September at the earliest? and the window ends mid October. if the above assumptions are correct, i think the percentages are accurate. i don't know if i have seen enough promising hardware. also it's Blue's first attempt to orbit. too many factors against them.

Okay that's fair, at least we're not disagreeing on conditions then. I'm just confused because all the markets of New Glenn launching in 2024 are at like 30%, and the discrepancy between that and 6% seems high. If they don't launch Escapade, I'm not so sure they'll launch at all this year.

Yeah, I'm assuming "a couple weeks late" means "more than a couple". I agree the launch window runs until mid-October, maybe later if they somehow find a way to squeeze out more delta V.

Question is badly written, but that's how I'm assuming it will be interpreted.

https://spacenews.com/nasa-planning-september-launch-of-mars-smallsat-mission-on-first-new-glenn/
"slated to be launching Sept. 29"

But a first launch slipping would not be at all unusual.

Still could do with agreement on what is sensible for this market to get it changed. I think September launch of Escapade should resolve yes perhaps even December 2024 launch of escapade should resolve yes. Launching something else then Escapade seems unlikely. Do other traders agree or think differently?

@ChristopherRandles Yes, I think the description says that what matters is that New Glenn is ready to launch the spacecraft on a trajectory that generally falls into the 2024 window to Mars, as opposed to the 2026 window or having it launch on a different rocket. Even an early 2025 launch should count because it would still be in this same launch window.

@dp9000 Yes I would be happy with that interpretation, as long as we know what we are betting on.

Does anyone disagree - i.e. think the "2024 launch window" should be interpreted as the formerly planned August launch from earth planning date and not the 2024-early 2025 Earth Mars transfer orbit window?

If no-one disagrees in the next week or so then I think we should get a mod to clarify the claim as DP suggests.

@ChristopherRandles myself and Zaphod are the major 'No' holders. I would hope a mod consults us rather than you a 'yes' holder. You can always open a later date or add the window caveat to a question you open. New Glenn will not be ready by end of august nor in time for ESCAPADE.

@AlexLf7a4 I would hope that a mod would listen to both sides of the argument and impartially decide who has the best case.

The main part of the question says "used for the ESCAPADE mission as planned" the part the no holders are relying on "(ie. be ready to launch by August 2024)" is in brackets.
In the description the launch window is ambiguous, is it the launch window from Earth to Earth orbit or is it the Mars transfer orbit window? The "(even if it launches a couple weeks late)" indicates it does not have to be within original August Earth launch planned window. Again it is in brackets so I don't think we should take the two week period as definitive. The intent is outside brackets while inside brackets seems like it is more aimed at adding extra context which in this case has instead added confusion. With such contradictions, dropping the confusing parts in brackets makes more sense.

You are welcome to put forward arguments why you think your interpretation is more justified.

Just saying 'consult us not them' does not seem impartial way of settling it to me.

Strong disagree to the original suggestion that early 2025 would count as "yes". I placed my No orders based on the faith that the wording in the question, August or a few weeks late, was precise. I would not consider October to be only a few weeks late . Right now the official launch window is already in late September.

To chime in on this, apparently the window closes mid-October and there's no fallback options. I think mid-October should still count as Yes for this market since it's the same window.