[schwarrrtz]

I mean, it's not like a really robust realtime feed would be much help for them anyway. As far as I know the rocket is completely autonomous, so even if something was going wrong during the landing a higher-quality feed would just give them higher-quality reasons to tear their hair out etc.

[ChuckMcM]

I disagree with this. Having diagnosed a number of problems in nominally 'autonomous' robots through the use of video. There are also instances of many issues being diagnosed by video, consider the loss of protection tiles on Columbia which was diagnosed (or at least confirmed) by watching video of the lift-off.

That said, SpaceX has a phenomenal number of video feeds and I really enjoy them. Early in the Falcon 9 project we would see on the web cast a cut to a video shot with no explanation of what it was, but we know now that they were looking a fuel settling and other effects during re-entry.

And yes, given that you can learn a lot from said videos about how it is done, and there is at least one high profile (Blue Origin) and a no doubt a number of low profile efforts on going to duplicate what SpaceX can do, there is some competitive advantage from not sharing all the video they have.

I still want to see them though.

[schwarrrtz]

I'm not saying that video wouldn't be helpful, just that realtime video wouldn't be helpful. They surely record the video for later analysis as others have mentioned.

[ChuckMcM]

Fair point, I was just trying to say that even near real time (record then replay once the barge had stabilized) would be useful for me.

[RandomBK]

None of the benefits you mentioned requires a real-time feed. They just need to capture and store the video for later analysis.

[foobarbecue]

Unless they want to, you know, analyse the landing before they launch another rocket two days later :-) . But of course that doesn't require realtime, just the ability to download via satellite while drone ship is on the move.