Self-Contained Missile Thruster

[tender delta]

All-in-one thruster containing 50% fuel (or empty space?) and 50% thruster capable of outputting up to an absolute maximum of 50% (maybe 40% at the same fuel usage as 50%) of a Variable Thruster's maximum thrust, possibly less than that, with a minimum (and possibly sole) fuel usage equal to the VT's minimum. Does not draw fuel from other fuel modules (maybe). Does not decrease missile lifetime the way standard thrusters do. Has start delay, maximum burn time, and optionally maximum thrust sliders (no ramp time).

Yes I do want this solely for the purpose of creating semi-practical, variable-range, rocket propelled depth charges and flares

(currently, ejector-propelled mines have an effective range of only about 800m-1km, while rocket-propelled ones are largely impractical due to requiring a full four modules and losing a lot of speed potential. 3-module rocket mines would have better range but not lose nearly as much magnet speed)

[hidden peak]

this would be cool for a discarting rocket boost
still allowing the booster right behind it to have a normal variable thruster or a torpedoe thruster

maybe on that line a version of that for the torpedoe, so a sub based missile system dont have to rely solely on ejectors and ballas to get out of the water

[tender delta]

Maybe? Discarding boosters are already implemented as part of cluster munitions though

[hidden peak]

the way ive read your suggestion sounded like a multi stage rockets

[trail arch]

this sounds like you are asking for a solid fuel rocket booster basically

i feel like it kinda replaces short range thrusters

[eager drift]

Sounds more for cases where they didn't want a full module's worth of fuel
I could see it for glide bombs too

[trail arch]

no, i do understand the use cases, i have wished for this too

smaller unguided missiles too

[soft leaf]

totally, this sounds like rocked asisted glide bombs

[tender delta]

Categorically no

Short ranged thrusters serve a very different purpose. Short ranged thrusters are used for very fast, limited range missiles. They're used for maximum kinetic damage and minimum intercept chance within ~2km. Their niche use as a glidebomb accelerator (e.g. by DWG) is secondary at best.

It is indeed mostly for cases where I don't want a full module's worth of fuel. It has a low velocity, the same or lower than the Variable Thruster. It is the opposite of the SRT.

[trail arch]

so, you woldn't use these for missile interceptors instead of short range thrusters?

[soft leaf]

Its is dofferent since this is more like an all in one variable thrusters

Or so it seems

[trail arch]

curious, i would have imagined it differently

[delicate solstice]

missile interceptors require 4 modules: int head, APN/fuel, steering, thruster. since APN already contains fuel, this wouldn't allow you to shorten an interceptor at all. Even if you made APNless interceptors (don't), it would shorten it to 3 modules, which is not a size that small or medium missiles can be

[real cairn]

Having an empty module to allow uneven-length smalls and mediums wouldn't be bad, though. It doesn't come up that much, but it's nice to have the option

[trail arch]

now you dould fill the APN with something that is not fuel, so more damage per interceptor

[unborn coral]

u cant increase damage from interceptors no matter what, only the missile size is used for interceptors (aka small or mediums have their own ammount of damage that they deal to munitions) and how many interceptors deal damage to the same munition with their AOE to kill munitions.

[trail arch]

so, if you fill them with HE it does not explode?

[unborn coral]

the interceptor doesn't deal any extra damage if it has a warhead also

[stone quarry]

it doesnt do damage to munitions

[trail arch]

then, it is more damage per interceptor, even if it is not that much.
in any case, i want to make it clear, i do appreciate the idea, i am just trying to think about consequences/balance,but i ran into this while thinking about short range unguided huge missiles

[stone quarry]

its does not add more damage per interceptor

missiles can only damage other missiles with the int head and thump damage

and the thump damage is both way weaker than an int head and doesnt matter because the int head is airburst

[shrewd coral]

Would be nice if there was an MD body too

[tender delta]

That is correct
Either an all-in-one variable thruster or an all-in-one low-velocity thruster

[tender delta]

You would not

If you did, you could potentially do interceptor-fin-fin-selfcontained but it would be slower than, and probably (I'd have to do the math) have lower turn rates than, interceptor-APN-turning-SRT

[stone quarry]

the fin in the spot right before the int head would add 0 turning as that is the com of the missile

[tender delta]

Thank you!

So yeah, it’d be worse for interceptors in all regards than SRT or VT.

Oh, not quite
I guess you could have Interceptor-APN-Turning-Selfcontained and have them use fuel exclusively for longer turning thruster burns

But I don’t think slow, overly maneuverable interceptor missiles are meta

[stone quarry]

they are generally considered better actually

ints dont need much speed, the missiles are already coming towards you, best to turn faster so you can intercept better

unless you're doing turreted ints in which case it really doesnt matter

[tender delta]

Oh, fair enough