Just Kerbal Things.

[Sharpy]

Post things that you do, that would make a rocket scientist cringe. Like...

Spoiler

...When you end with 4000 more delta-V than you need, because of structural reasons. Oh, Orange tank really fit the rocket geometry there. Anyway, Minmus in less than 2 days.

When you base your decision upon which rocket engines to use on "they will make fine landing legs."

When you route exhaust of a nuclear engine through the center of a crew cabin.

When your craft is SSTO, because you had problems with decouplers

 

[bengee777]

You know you play too much ksp when you half to buy RAM expansion units because ksp now take up 10GB of RAM.

also, because I'm that guy, FIRST!!! (comment that is)

Edited September 6, 2016 by bengee777

[Madrias]

When you still occasionally see re-entry flares on takeoff.

[Chiron0224]

1 hour ago, Madrias said:

When you still occasionally see re-entry flares on takeoff.

"occasionally".  Actually I did finally perform a successful gravity turn last night and didn't get the burn in effects.

Also; When you dump a stage with a third of it's fuel left because you don't need it anymore and it's mass is slowing you down.

[Madrias]

48 minutes ago, Chiron0224 said:

dump a stage with a third of it's fuel left

I've been guilty of this on more occasions than I care to mention.

Also:  When you design a rocket not for efficiency or reusability, but instead design in such a way that you can eject the SRB's with about 1/4 fuel remaining and watch the fireworks as they crash into one another.

[Magzimum]

... When you take the approach of a 10 year old playing with Lego: When you design a mothership for 14 Kerbals, when 2 or 3 would be sufficient, house them in cupolas and R&D labs because they look nicer, add 6 docking ports because "you never know", add landing legs on the 300 ton monster so it can land on Minmus or Gilly "just in case", and add totally unnecessary lamps on the sides to decorate it.

[Jimmidii]

"Eh, looks about right, let's launch and see if it works."

[septemberWaves]

Adding 300 tonnes of unnecessary mass to interplanetary transports for aesthetics.

[Red Iron Crown]

Not mine, but I'm pretty sure any real life rocket scientist would cringe:

https://zippy.gfycat.com/ConfusedVibrantAndalusianhorse.webm

[Brainlord Mesomorph]

What's "Nuclear Safety"?

[Archgeek]

When you put a tiny atmospheric probe on a vehicle with with enough delta-v to exit the system repeatedly "so it can get there faster".

[SpacedCowboy]

Jeb never having to say "I'll be back!"

[Pecan]

But, but, many rocket-scientists play KSP because these very things make them cheer or laugh!
The same reason programmers put games/Easter eggs in everything they write; we all live in a world where we sometimes think "If only I could ..."

[SpacedCowboy]

7 hours ago, Archgeek said:

When you put a tiny atmospheric probe on a vehicle with with enough delta-v to exit the system repeatedly "so it can get there faster".

Yeah, "Pedal to the metal!" ,,, that's Kerbal.

[James Kerman]

When the flight instructions for your SSTO includes the line "allow the rocket to flip over 3 times at 30,000m and power up again when close to prograde".

[Snark]

When your kerbal gets out to push.

[Sharpy]

When you set thrust limiter to 50% on your transfer stage, because its TWR of 80 was ripping your payload to shreds.

[ZooNamedGames]

On September 6, 2016 at 8:10 PM, Chiron0224 said:

"occasionally".  Actually I did finally perform a successful gravity turn last night and didn't get the burn in effects.

Also; When you dump a stage with a third of it's fuel left because you don't need it anymore and it's mass is slowing you down.

Actually dumping a stage with leftover propellant isn't Kerbal, that's realistic. Often NASA and other space agencies dump prior stages with fuel leftover. Now this excess is generally for any margin of error and might be used if something happened but the point is even NASA does that.

KSP is unqiue in that it's rare to NOT burn a stage completely dry.

[Sharpy]

21 minutes ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Actually dumping a stage with leftover propellant isn't Kerbal, that's realistic. Often NASA and other space agencies dump prior stages with fuel leftover. Now this excess is generally for any margin of error and might be used if something happened but the point is even NASA does that.

KSP is unqiue in that it's rare to NOT burn a stage completely dry.

At worst, you'll be hauling that Twin Boar from the launch stage to Eeloo, It will come in handy for the capture burn.

[cubinator]

6 hours ago, Sharpy said:

At worst, you'll be hauling that Twin Boar from the launch stage to Eeloo,

...and possibly trying to land on it because it's still half full and you just can't fathom putting so much fuel to waste. 

[Aegolius13]

Hypersonic biplanes... Or triplanes...

Fastidiouly taking barometer readings in deep space.

Using airplane parts because your nuclear engine was not designed to work with rocket parts.

Using an RTG in a Cessna-type light plane because it's easier than a fuel cell.

Intentionally spinning out of control to survive reentry better.

Landing on a grass field is easier than the runway.

The Klaw can latch onto anything... Except the ground.

"Explosive decoupling"  is like the entire Kerbal experience in two words.

Edited September 13, 2016 by Aegolius13

[StrandedonEarth]

11 hours ago, ZooNamedGames said:

Actually dumping a stage with leftover propellant isn't Kerbal, that's realistic. Often NASA and other space agencies dump prior stages with fuel leftover. Now this excess is generally for any margin of error and might be used if something happened but the point is even NASA does that.

KSP is unqiue in that it's rare to NOT burn a stage completely dry.

Indeed, any turbo-pump-fed engine will leave some propellants in the tank, since running a turbopump dry will turn into a RUD. There was one Shuttle mission where the main engines shut down due to a signal from the Engine Cutoff Sensor in the ET. It seems there had been a bit of a LH₂ leak somewhere.

But when you're dealing with kerbals, 

[Magzimum]

On 9/7/2016 at 8:43 AM, Magzimum said:

... When you take the approach of a 10 year old playing with Lego: When you design a mothership for 14 Kerbals, when 2 or 3 would be sufficient, house them in cupolas and R&D labs because they look nicer, add 6 docking ports because "you never know", add landing legs on the 300 ton monster so it can land on Minmus or Gilly "just in case", and add totally unnecessary lamps on the sides to decorate it.

... When you post the text above about a week ago, then build it, add an additional big bottom stage, two additional probes, and many more docking ports, and take it on a test flight to Jool.

w00t, she made it, and actually performs brilliantly!