Yes, Solar Max was the first to be repaired. And there were some other satellites that were retrieved and brought back.
But (yes there are always bad excuses) cost of flying Shuttle is far more expensive than the satellite itself. I remember in 1970s/1980s there was lots of talk about space tugs, then poof all such articles disappeared. Later in 1990s in a project management class, instructor mentioned a parametric study on space tugs resulted in energy changes to change orbits from typical 250mile at 28.5 deg Shuttle orbit to get to various satellites will take more energy than to send a spacecraft to the Moon. Shuttle could change orbit inclination but not by much (I think about 1 deg). Damn physics again prevents science fiction becoming reality.
On a side note, Shuttle capable of retrieving satellites was something the Soviets ***did not*** like as their recon birds were ripe for pickings.
On NASAwatch someone posted this insightful comment:
"I blame most of the destination argument on the creation of the Mars underground in the 1980's. Prior to that NASA was focused on using the Shuttle for industrialization in LEO with projects like demonstrating the repair and return of satellites, building structural items in orbit, tethers, etc., all logical starting points for building a Cislunar industrial capability that would have given us the Solar System. NASA didn't even have plans to send robots to Mars. By advocating that we needed to skip the Moon and go rushing off to Mars they started this entire useless destination debate that has paralyzed space policy ever since."
The look of absolute horror on his face when he asked "Why would you want to see that?" is something I have not forgotten.
I've noticed veterans that have been in combat rarely talk about it. When they do, a common theme is how chaotic it was. And those who talk a lot about battles and firefights were never in one.
Book 'I'm, Danno.
you realize that nobody under 50 knows what you are talking about.
Interesting comment. It seems to me people in this country don't have the culture or mindset for high speed rail. In US especially California they are trains of railroad tracks that great grandpa built with grade crossings (problems of cars getting hit by trains, people committing suicide). In other countries HSR are systems (and there are no RR crossings, roads and walkways either go over or under). And then there is the "government is the problem!" bitching while infrastructure continues to deteriorate in this country. I don't see private companies stepping in to fill what needs to be done (except for exclusive areas, not region wide).
Though there are many supporters of HSR in high places, I get suspicious they're mostly motivated for profit (huge construction contracts). I also have email subscription to USHSR, I notice a complete lack of any kind of ASCE participation in all their conferences (maybe they have representation, I haven't find them). But occasionally USHSR puts out some insightful comments such as this:
"Congress members who continue to block funding for high speed rail are increasingly being seen as preventing progress and solutions to the nation's problems. These members of Congress can even be viewed as un-American sitting doing nothing as the nation suffers with our deteriorating transportation systems."
Though Musk's concept is interesting, can it be scaled to cover everywhere? and not just choice places that has business?
Sort of reminds me of what happened to Preston Tucker, just not quite to that extent yet.
What about comparing Musk with that visionary automobile pioneer? There are major differences but I think much better comparison than to a fictional character of Tony Stark. At least Musk has produced usable hardware while Tucker got bogged down with prototypes (hey, Telsa almost went belly-up in 2008).
Not many actors today still actively working who started in the 1940's either. But he was working right up until the end.
I guess if you have to go, leave "feet first."
It seems most phone calls I get are from robotelemarketers. Sometimes the person will leave message of "hello, hello, anyone there?" as if they didn't listen to the intro "please leave a message after the tone." If you don't want to leave a message, you should have understood nobody is home (with exception of do I want to pick up the phone for someone important like a friend calling for realtime conversation).
What gets me is people who leave longwinded messages, talking at slow-slow rate. Then at end of their "War and Peace novel" message, they leave their phone number at warp speed.
Congratulations! You are the one-millionth user to log into our system. If there's anything special we can do for you, anything at all, don't hesitate to ask!