A solar eclipse just destroyed my space station!

[Madrias]

I've lost so many Kerbin Science Air Rovers to eclipses that it's not even funny anymore. Doesn't matter whether I'm farting my way through the sky on an Ant engine, glowing brightly with Xenon, or spraying my way across an ocean with monopropellant, an eclipse will outright kill my airborne science rovers. I carry, maybe, 5 minutes of battery onboard (excepting for the Xenon one, which usually just dies the instant the solar panels are obstructed), but usually, I'm in the middle of transmitting back that awesome temperature science report when it happens.

I've started space-taping Kerbals into the seats on the bloody things.

[foamyesque]

I had a probe wind up on an escape trajectory because it's engine was pointed directly at the Sun with zero rotation. Never lost a space station to it, though.

[KerikBalm]

Why are you at 67 km, only gong <600 m/s ?

A nearly 1900 m/s circularization burn is way too much.

If you need a burn that much, you need a large engine, and those all have alternators. A better gravity turn would get you into orbit with fuel and electrcity to spare....

[RainDreamer]

Well, I guess this is to show how important pre-flight planning is. Also the importance of building yourcraft to have multiple backup function so that if things goes wrong you can still salvage it.

[vinsent10]

Good,now you won't have a ....ty station without batteries.

[kinnison]

when I am building something usually how it gets powered is the 2nd to last thing I do. at the minimum 2 solar panels and a Batman, or a RTG.

That is one of my issues early in career, normally an unmanned probe cannot make it to minmus without a solar panel.

[Tankbuster32]

I've had solar eclipses kill my lunar probes, and they had batteries!

[Renegrade]

Suddenly, the probe dies. I look and see that the solar panels are blocked by the Mun. I look up and see the solar eclipse. I do not regain power until space station reaches 40,000 ft and begins to break apart. It cost 80,000 funds to launch too. Has this happened to anyone else?

Not in a very, very long time. After the first time, all my designs included enough batteries to survive darkness events, even if they're NOT designed to transmit science.

Also I'd like to point out that you have over two-thirds of a ton of solar panels when most missions can get by with two to four ox-stats...

Note that Z-100s and Z-400s have no mass for the purposes of spacecraft maneuvering - they only count towards VAB/launchpad limits. So you can slap 4-way symmetrical Z-400s to a design without worrying about it losing delta-v.

[UmbralRaptor]

The whole picture is confusing. As hard as it is to see, the launch stage appears to have a Skipper, so any probes would have been fully charged and easy to recharge (note that there's lots of fuel left). Unless they've been leaning hard on the reactionwheels during the coast phase, (Which might explain why the craft is pointing retrograde for some reason) 4:25 isn't long enough to run down a probe with only internal batteries. That 4:25 also clearly is well past apoapsis, given the craft's relatively rapid descent, implying that the craft ran out long before.

And given that passing behind planets is inevitable, why it wouldn't a station have at least one battery so it can last half an orbit in the shade is unclear

[Axelord FTW]

Having played with RemoteTech a fair bit by now, I can say that the Mun has a tendency of not being where it wouldn't be a problem.

It has killed my first ever RT Minmus lander probe.

[LadyAthena]

I never had any problems with solar eclipses before, but they really should be less common...

That's realism, and epic. I love situations like these, things you least expect, and ... moments, but great none the less.

[Crown]

Yep. It happened to me, just yesterday when I launched a probe in an eccentric orbit around Kerbin as I ran out of juice. Thanks to the Great Kerbal I had saved before launch so I did put some batteries on to get me through the shadow.