Why anyone would use capsules on rockets?

[Jester]

The cockpits for planes all have 40m/s impact survival, while the rocket capsules have 8-15 m/s impact survival. both have similar heat resistance. so why would anyone use capsule on their rocket? Heck with 40 m/s impact I would put the cockpit on the bottom to obsorb the impact.

[Stickmiin]

Depends on the weight of the cockpit vs the weight of the pod tbh, the impact resistance matters almost nothing if you can get more dV out of one option over the other. Also, I dont think there's that many situations where you can look at and say ''man, i wish i had just a slightly stronger cockpit'', specially because if you are gonna hit the ground, you try to hit it with anything but the place where your pilot is. The cockpits are also more limited in type, which makes them less fit for many situations.

[Jabroni Slayr]

Only one word needed here.

Aesthetics.

And "realism" so I suppose maybe two words.

[mr moo]

Why tf you landing on your cockpit bro

[howardsheard]

the mrk 1 cockpit is more susceptible to heating 2K vs 2.2K respectively, requires more electricity and weights 0.5T more and prob most importantly does not have an attachment node at the top. if your planning on crashing the mrk 1 maybe the way to go, if not there are better options

[GeneralVeers]

I think the operative question is: if you can build craft like this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYuP54zsHsM

......or this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6dfZLUWSl4

......or this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F92l2s_bO-k

.....then who the hell cares about the "why"??? :)

In KSP, it's more like "BECAUSE WE CAN, AND ALSO WE HAVE AN F9 KEY!!!"

[Jester]

Also why anyone would use the Hitchhiker storage container? it's 4 crew for 2.5 ton and impact of less than 10m/s, while you can make a bundle of 3x 2 passengers cabines and a tricoupler for 3.15 ton(3.3 if you cap both ends) at impact of 40m/s. That's for 6 crews.

[Jester]

Originally posted by RoofCatA:

Originally posted by Jester:

Also why anyone would use the Hitchhiker storage container? it's 4 crew for 2.5 ton and impact of less than 10m/s, while you can make a bundle of 3x 2 passengers cabines and a tricoupler for 3.15 ton(3.3 if you cap both ends) at impact of 40m/s. That's for 6 crews.

you can't cap both ends with tricoupler (it will connect to only 1 part). No loops allowed in VAB. Also Hitchhiker has doors and better stability as for landers. Though MK1 Crew Cabin is a great part too - for example for large tourist missions to Sun orbit or cheap "base" contracts. They are both ok.

Ummm...
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=835330585
This is the ship I use to ferry tourists, can be used for other purpose, if you want to eva a crew just transfer them tot he capsule and eva from there.
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=835329895
also more fun can be had with tri-coupler
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=835330728

[Operation40]

keep in mind the mk1 crew cabin is relatively new.. I still use the hitchhiker.. I've had weird crap happen with the tricoupler and mk1 cabin -- I think it actually clips slightly.. plus the hitchhiker is just so darn Kerbal

[MythicalHeFF]

Ever heard of the Mk 1-2 command pod? It can survive 45 m/s crashes. Also, I don't see why you would want such a high impact tolerance on your capsule if you're going to be landing with parachutes anyways.