[WalterBright]

My knowledge of what is and isn't practical with streaming technology isn't much better than that of a layperson.

I do find the aviation industry to be sometimes peculiarly behind the times. For example, a few years ago, I wondered online why airports did not have constant video recording of the runway and taxiways. Such would have been enormously helpful in solving many accidents, such as the SST crash.

But an airline pilot argued with me, saying that such would be cost prohibitive and thoroughly impractical. I was baffled by such statements, given that every 7-11 had constant video surveillance.

I do follow air crashes and the subsequent investigations, the engineer in me just cannot resist. The investigations are so thorough these days that it's pretty rare that the cause and chain of events are not thoroughly understood. The only issue is sometimes it takes years, which can get pretty frustrating for people (including me) who like instant answers. The mitigating factor is accidents are now extremely rare. I don't think that the cost of a live streaming system is clearly worth it.

The black box system has turned out to be probably the biggest single factor in improving safety ever devised. They work great, and the aviation industry is (naturally) very conservative about changing things that work.

[WalterBright]

A lot of accidents happen on the runway or shortly after. Video will tell a lot of things that telemetry won't - visibility, runway incursions, just where the airplane lifted off, ice on the wings, fire or smoke, any missing parts (!), open doors, working lights, bird strikes, etc. It can also be a backup if the telemetry is lost, such as speed, position of the flaps, problems with the landing gear, etc.