Talk:Starship flight test 3

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Starship flight test 3 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 30 days

It is requested that an image or photograph of the launch of IFT-3 be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
Wikipedians in Texas may be able to help!
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Rocketry Low‑importance

	Rocketry portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rocketry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of rocketry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RocketryWikipedia:WikiProject RocketryTemplate:WikiProject RocketryRocketry
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Spaceflight: SpaceX working group Mid‑importance

	Spaceflight portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by SpaceX working group.

United States: Texas Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas.

On 30 July 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved from SpaceX Starship integrated flight test 3 to Starship flight test 3. The result of the discussion was moved.

Propelant Transfer Demo

Acording to NASA, it was succesful Yukielgato (talk) 12:34, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yukielgato: Please provide a source. Nosferattus (talk) 00:06, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Check X Yukielgato (talk) 15:48, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

X/Twitter is not WP:RS, see WP:TWITTER. Use a more reliable source. 187.46.134.26 (talk) 04:08, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2024/03/starship-3rd-time/

"SpaceX were able to complete the Payload door test and the cryogenic transfer test" Redacted II (talk) 17:37, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Completing a test doesn't mean it's successful. This source doesn't support an outcome because the data is being reviewed. This is exactly what NASA says: "The propellant transfer demonstration operations were completed, and the NASA-SpaceX team is currently reviewing the flight data that was received." Redraiderengineer (talk) 17:54, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but with the information available, the correct label is success. Redacted II (talk) 17:57, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SpaceX isn't calling it a success yet. They say the same thing as the other sources.

Starship "initiat[ed] a propellant transfer demonstration" and "results from these demonstrations will come after postflight data review is complete." Redraiderengineer (talk) 18:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Several RS are calling it a success, though. Redacted II (talk) 18:33, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop editing the propellent transfer demo to say successful. Unless there is an official source/statement, the outcome of the event should be considered as unknown as any unofficial sources can be speculation. Davidv15123 (talk) 13:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are reliable sources that say it was a success. In fact, IIRC, secondary sources (such as the one being used) are preferred over primary sources. Redacted II (talk) 14:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps "Completed, result pending data review" until more information becomes available? this NASA source uses the word "completed" specifically:

"One objective closely tied to future Artemis operations is the transfer of thousands of pounds of cryogenic propellant between internal tanks during the spacecraft’s coast phase as part of NASA’s Space Technology Missions Directorate 2020 Tipping Point awards. The propellant transfer demonstration operations were completed, and the NASA-SpaceX team is currently reviewing the flight data that was received. This Tipping Point technology demonstration is one of more than 20 development activities NASA is undertaking to solve the challenges of using cryogenic fluids during future missions."

Just to be a smidge pedantic though, a well executed experiment is technically a good experiment even if it doesn't give you the answer you were hoping for. :D From this statement, they seem care more about studying the general problem than between these two specific tanks. Foonix0 (talk) 18:39, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like a good balance, and I've changed the wording to match. Redraiderengineer (talk) 18:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, y was wrong, that Is the best option Yukielgato (talk) 17:57, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]