Much more sane than the phys.org write-up. The advantage of this isn't "would consume its own structure during ascent" (what does that even mean??), it's that this would have the simplicity, cost, and storability of a solid rocket with the throttleability of a liquid rocket.

(Side note: Great caption on figure 5. "Second firing. The engine was extinguished by an explosion at 142s.")

Phys.org is a low value website that republishes press releases, in this case this one: https://www.gla.ac.uk/news/headline_586616_en.html

Aaaah. Didn't know the source.

Also, I find it funny that it's the UK partner that published the press release and the paper, even though the actual research was done in Ukraine (where there's a lot of Soviet space industry legacy) and the paper seems to indicate that the Glasgow contribution was just to give them modern instrumentation.