If civilian ships are routinely taking off from dirtside, booster services would make sense, though it's probably more sensible to employ shuttles in the first place. Launch ramps may also be worth looking at, and there's also the lift effect airframes provide that may let the ship gain enough altitude to make orbit (highly dependent on local conditions).
The other reason to have dedicated launcjh vehicles is to maximise payload to orbit.
A ship designed for deep space operation I have pegged at ~25% fuel tank, a launch vehicle only needs a couple of hours, less if it can refuel in orbit for the return trip which means an extra 20% payload capacity.
As to deep space ships having 2g engines, the difference between the 1g and 2g machinery is not that great, but the only place you can't launch from is Earth's surface, although the usual caveats about lifting body design apply...
Mercury, the Moon, the moons of Jupiter and Saturn are all accessible with a 1g engine. Even Venus, after it has been cooled by building a huge sunshade,,,
Lack of gravitics makes orbital stations a lot more attractive (in standard Traveller it really doesn't make much difference if there's a highport or not.
I would also investigate investing in Aldrin cyclers.
So orbital space ports around Earth, Moon, Mars, Venus to start with, then expand outwards to get highports around the major moons of Saturn and Jupiter.
Also... just because a civilian ship doesn't usually thrust harder than 1G doesn't mean they wouldn't consider 2G drives, especially if they ARE making planetfall a lot.
Shame the rules don't like fractional g drives, 1.2g would do it
If the alternative is paying someone to boost you to where you can continue, or carrying a shuttle, maybe it is worth installing a larger reaction drive.
I agree.
You won't need to run the jump drive during liftoff, so the extra power points are probably there on a starship. A 1.5G reaction drive might also suffice - in this sort of setting I would DEFINTELY bother with fractional thrusts and extend the travel tables.
By the time the experimental jump drive is a thing I envision reaction drive technology to be on the cusp of TL9, technically the early jump drive is going to require a shift to fusion but I still can't see why a TL8 fission plant with reduced size x2 can't be used since it outputs 10 EP, the same as the TL8 fusion plant.
With larger ships you can also generate spin gravity simply by spinning the whole ship, cheaper than hamster cages. Sleeping quarters are next to the outer hull, but portholes may not be advised... beds and floors can be set up to adjust to whatever the current acceleration vector is.
There are a few ways to configure it, pay the costs for hamster cage and you can mess around with the actual engineering.
You also need to look at how long it is before low gravity health issues kick in. If following the default one week in jumpspace (no G unless you spin) followed by one week of gravity (either thrusting to or from jump point, then on a planet or rotating station), you may not need much special attention to the matter, or rule that people need to exercise while in Jump. There's also the possibility that in this setting medical science has come up with something to help out.
More good points.
