Purdue77 wrote: “That’s not how the missile works unless the target is stationary. Once the motor burns out drag takes over and without thrust the missile head either explodes (if designed to do so) or the missile falls back to earth. Once the missile burns out it falls back to earth on a ballistic trajectory. The fins on the missile are used to maneuver the missile while thrusting. They are not wings. Once the missile burns out it no longer has lift.”
I do not know of any air defense missile that ‘explodes’ it’s warhead at sustainer motor burn out. Nor does it just “fall back to earth”. The missile will still be supersonic at burnout and capable of executing additional maneuvers. The fins do not require thrust to maneuver the missile, they require airflow over their surfaces. Lift is also caused by airflow and as long as the missile is moving through the air it will have “lift”.
BTW, I have an aerospace engineering degree and spent almost fifty years in missile development.
Also, I don't know what your definition of "lift" is, but the rocket body like the fuselage of an airplane produces negligible lift unless it is a flying wing.
BTW: my aerospace engineering degree was in space launch vehicle design and solid rocket motors.
By the way, my intention is not to compare who has the bigger degree or knowledge. I will bow to your knowledge and experience in this area. I, too often, try to be brief and unfortunately, garble my message. We conservatives have bigger issues to concern us and don’t need to argue among ourselves.