All three landers touch down into the same 465°C / 92-bar environment. Their electronics respond differently because of what the semiconductor itself is made of, not because of anything about the landing.
Si, no cooling: T(t) = amb − (amb−27)·e^(−t/0.6h) → fails ≈2h
Si, cooling: T held ≈45–90°C while coolant > 0
once coolant = 0 → same fast rise as A
SiC: T(t) = amb always → never fails
- Lander A has no cooling mass to carry, but its silicon junctions exceed their ~150°C rating almost immediately and the package is cooked within a couple of simulated hours — matching Venera's real ~2-hour surface record.
- Lander B spends 145 kg (21% of lander mass) on a phase-change/refrigeration system to hold its ordinary silicon chips below their rating. That buys roughly a day, but the coolant and power budget are finite — once depleted, the electronics heat-soak to ambient just like Lander A.
- Lander C's silicon-carbide bandgap (~3.3 eV vs silicon's 1.1 eV) lets its transistors switch correctly with the junction sitting at 465°C, so it needs no cooling mass and simply keeps running — the operational clock climbs into days and weeks as you fast-forward.
- Time acceleration — scales simulated surface time so you can watch Lander A fail in seconds, Lander B fail after ~30 simulated hours, and Lander C's counter keep climbing.