Tweets and news suggest that Chandrayaan-2 lander may have been located, using thermal imaging by the Chandrayaan-2 orbiter.
Space.com: India Just Found Its Lost Vikram Lander on the Moon, Still No Signal
K Sivan, chief of the Indian Space Research Organisation, said today (Sept. 8) that the Vikram lander was located by Chandrayaan-2 and efforts to restore contact the probe will continue for at least 14 days, according to a Times of India report.
"We have found the location of Lander Vikram on [the] lunar surface and Orbiter has clicked a thermal image of Lander," Sivan told the ANI news service in an interview, adding that attempts to communicate with the lander are ongoing.
Science Alert: Update: India Has Located Its Lost Moon Lander And Is Trying to Make Contact
n an exclusive interview, ISRO Chairman K. Sivan told India Today TV that the Chandrayaan 2 orbiter had sent back a thermal image of the location of the Vikram lander, and they're now attempting to contact it.
Asian News International: tweet
Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) Chief, K Sivan to ANI:We've found the location of #VikramLander on lunar surface&orbiter has clicked a thermal image of Lander. But there is no communication yet. We are trying to have contact. It will be communicated soon. #Chandrayaan2
New York Times: India Says It Has Located Chandrayaan-2 Lander on Moon’s Surface
K. Sivan, the director of the Indian Space Research Organization, told national news outlets that a thermal image had been taken by the Chandrayaan-2 mission’s orbiter. He said it was still unclear whether the lander was damaged, though he expected it had experienced a “hard landing.”
“We are trying to establish a contact,” he was quoted as saying by Asian News International.
The thermal image from the orbiter has not been released publicly. A spokesman for the space agency did not respond to requests for comment on Sunday.
Question: Why a thermal image? Is there expected to be better contrast than in visible light? Does Chandrayaan-2 not have a visible light camera? Wouldn't the diffraction-limited resolution at thermal infrared (5-20 microns) be much worse than in the visible (0.4-0.7 microns)?