Solar Panels

[Stilgar2300]

So when your re-entering Kerbin's atmosphere do you retract the solar panels or do you let them get destroyed? I personally let them get destroyed, a little bit of a show.

[rasheed]

I make em burn up. Quite a show indeed

[Aragosnat]

Depends if I need them or not.

[Galileo Kerbonaut]

I always retract them before re-entry. I try to limited the damage on each and every stage.

[elxverde]

Assuming reusability will be incentivized in the final release, I try to keep everything intact upon re-entry.

[Madrias]

Depends. If the mission's completely over, panels wide open, all deployables extended, gear down, and I hit atmo with engines screaming, making as bright a fireball and debris trail as I can. Including shedding 'excess weight' by staging everything I can. If it's part of a multi-trip mission, panels folded, retract everything, gear up, careful deceleration to land where I intend, rather than just spewing a comet trail of debris behind the craft on purpose.

[DisarmingBaton5]

If it's a reusable SM/spacecraft, retracted. Otherwise it's nice to watch each one in its own little fireball.

[FlamedSteak]

Retract them, no need to shower the public with unnecessary debris.

All other debris I consider souvenirs for the Kerbal lucky enough to have it come crashing through his roof.

[OrbitusII]

I say let them burn! Unless the vehicle is designed to be "reusable," I leave them deployed.

[CalculusWarrior]

If they're part of a service module I've dumped, I leave them extended and enjoy watching the show. If they're part of the main ship however, I will retract them regardless if I'm reusing the spacecraft or not.

[rdfox]

Depends on if I plan to use them again after entry. If it's a terminal descent for the module they're on, they stay deployed--no point in complicating things with retraction motors if the whole thing's gonna burn up/crash, right? Likewise, if they're on a descent stage for a two-stage lander, and the ascent stage has its own solar arrays, they stay deployed "to simplicate and add lightness," as Colin Chapman put it.

However, any solar arrays that actually need to be used again *after* entry are closed before entry and stay closed until touchdown (or at least full parachute deployment, on one-way atmospheric probes to the inner planets). It's an engineer thing--keep it as simple as possible to meet the specs. IRL, you might even choose to include a second set of post-landing solar arrays, letting the cruise-phase arrays break up during entry and deploying the post-landing arrays... well, post-landing, IF that's seen as less of a complexity/weight penalty than outfitting the cruise-phase arrays to retract and then deploy again. (And don't laugh--getting solar arrays to fold back up to restow themselves is a pretty difficult task. Ever try folding a road map back up one-handed? That's basically what you're doing. Deployment is relatively easy. Restowing is hard enough that when they replaced the Hubble's solar arrays on the first servicing mission, they didn't even bother trying to restow them--even though it WAS equipped to do so--they just rotated them to not interfere with the Shuttle when they captured it, then disconnected them while still deployed.)