[scarygliders]

Whilst I realise that it would eat into the weight budget of such landers, I reckon adding a fuel cell with enough fuel to last through the lunar night, which keeps the lander and its batteries alive, should be a standard and integral part of such craft.

Of course, that would mean taking less science with it, and increase the cost of the lander, and quite possibly if I can think of such a thing, engineers more clever than I am have already considered such.

Still, congrats to the team for managing to at least soft land on the moon. No doubt they'll be learning a lot of lessons from this mission.

[LorenPechtel]

Fuel cells aren't some magic solution, they need fuel and it wouldn't be recovered. The normal operating procedure for lunar craft is to expect them to die on their first night. There's not a lot of advantage to sitting around in the same spot, equipping a probe to survive the night isn't worth it.

It's just this one landed badly and "night" for it's panels is going to come sooner than expected.

[fnordpiglet]

I’m surprised the battery doesn’t just recharge after one or more cycles.

[two_handfuls]

It’s too cold for too long, the electronics get damaged. Note that the lunar night lasts about 14 earth days.

[fnordpiglet]

Sounds like a problem a small pellet of nuclear fuel could resolve even without a reactor.

[two_handfuls]

Sure. That comes with some paperwork, but Mars rovers have nuclear fuel for example.

This may be harder for a commercial lander like this one though.