>>14222878No, because the rods are extremely heavy, and therefore very difficult to maneuver quickly. For satellite vs satellite warfare, you want something lightweight with a lot of delta-v (essentially a measure of the ability to maneuver in space) Because satellites are so fragile and moving so fast, you don't need anything heavy to kill a satellite. You certainly don't need a telephone pole of tungsten to kill a satellite, that's just kind of ridiculous. You don't even need the conventional explosives of a traditional missile. All you need is a rocket motor and guidance systems.
The interceptors planned for Brilliant Pebbles are like this. With Brilliant Pebbles, the plan was to launch several thousand small satellites into orbit, which would communicate with each other and scan for enemy rocket launches. They were to have sensors, communication gear, and rocket motors. That's it, no tungsten anything, no warhead at all. When a launch was detected, the interceptors would crash themselves into the rocket when it was still in the boost phase in the upper atmosphere, before it even reached space. Such a system is designed to counter ballistic missiles, fractional orbital bombardment, boost-glide missiles, and more.
Brilliant Pebbles was the ultimate strategic missile defense system, but it was shelved in 1993 because it was completely impractical to launch thousands of satellites into orbit. Incidentally, SpaceX has been launching thousands of satellites recently...
