Shadowy Man
Contributor
I don’t think we are disagreeing here. They were supposed to touchdown with zero lateral velocity yet they had 2mph. That was likely a major factor in the topple.Which doesn't change the basic issue. Killing your horizontal velocity before you have to costs you fuel. The optimum course has your rocket only reaching no horizontal speed/entirely vertical orientation at touchdown. There is also the issue that control authority always costs, you don't put more of it than you need. (Note: KSP is a horrible model in this regard, control authority is way, way overdone for the sake of gameplay.)Straight down will cost you extra fuel, you do not want to kill your horizontal velocity any earlier than you have to.I believe it had to do with the way the fuel consumption would affect the center of mass, but I’m sure there’s a longer answer out there.Should search, but I wonder what reason there is for designing the lander to be top heavy and prone to toppling?
Had they come straight down instead of laterally it would have been less likely to topple, so they’ll need to understand what led to the trajectory they had.
But it certainly does seem to suggest potential redesigns.
By “straight down” I was referring to the final moments. They hit the ground moving at an unplanned 2mph horizontal speed. The plan was for 0mph horizontal speed at the time of touchdown.
It seems clear now that the craft thought it was higher up, which is likely why it still had horizontal velocity. As you point out you want to wait until the very end to null that out.