The spacecraft failed long before it tipped over. With the altitude laser system out of action, it wasn't going to land correctly unless they got lucky, which t

The spacecraft failed long before it tipped over. With the altitude laser system out of action, it wasn't going to land correctly unless they got lucky, which they didn't. Like the article said in the last line, the margin of error is only manageable if all the systems are functioning correctly. The argument over the height of the lander is as nonsensical as arguing over any of the thousands of other design decisions. Second guessing literal rocket scientists is silly. The lander was designed as a whole, any single change - redundant systems, extendible legs, etc., etc. - would have required other changes due to weight or space constraints, requiring other changes, ad nauseum. The specific thing that killed this landing is a failure in quality control/checklists which if done better would have ensured all the systems operated correctly and a successful landing.