"They're getting the reputation for being a pretty gutsy company that's willing to get things done," Marco Caceres, director of space studies with Teal Group, a Fairfax, Virginia-based consultant, said in a Jan. 10 phone interview.

"Overall, I would rate it as a success," Marco Caceres, director of space studies with Teal Group, a Fairfax, Virginia-based consulting firm, said in a phone interview.

"It is tricky to hit something that small to begin with, but to hit with the right velocity so that it lands perfectly when the barge is moving in the ocean -- that's a tough challenge," Caceres said. "They're not taking the easy way. That's not the conservative approach."

Bombardier may find it difficult to carve out space, given the preference among many air carriers to stick with a single aircraft maker, according to Richard Aboulafia, vice president for analysis at the Teal Group, an aerospace and defense industry analysis firm. More important, he said, Boeing and Airbus have a significant cost advantage.

"Of the three recent disasters, none would have changed" with real-time black boxes, says Richard Aboulafia, an aviation analyst with the Teal Group. "You're just talking about faster closure."

Instead of real-time data tracking, it makes more sense to have the capability to stream all that data in real-time and use it only when something's amiss. If an anomaly—cabin depressurization, say, or an engine malfunction—occurs, air traffic control, carriers and the aircraft manufacturer could begin streaming data from that specific aircraft. This is something that existing communications technology could easily support, were such a system developed, would it would provide much more information to investigators during and immediately after an in-flight incident.

"That capability is currently under development," says Mary I. McMillan, vice president for aviation safety and operational services with satellite communications provider Inmarsat.

As with many things in commercial aviation, the technology is not the biggest hurdle. What data to stream, when to stream it, and how to stream it would be debated among the many constituents involved—airlines, pilots, governmental regulators and the like. Everyone from pilots unions, the International Civil Aviation Organization, national regulatory agencies like the FAA as well as carriers would all need to sign off, and we'd need spectrum dedicated to the communication system. There was years of debate over the privacy implications of cockpit voice recorders before they were adopted, and any discussion of real-time data monitoring would undoubtedly fuel similar debate and discussion.

"There's a lot of sensitivity around information like that," McMillan says. "I wouldn't pretend that it's easy to mandate black box in the cloud."

All that aside, even if the technology to stream flight data recorder data in real-time were developed, there's no guarantee carriers would adopt it without a regulatory mandate. Various regulatory agencies have what's called a Minimum Equipment List, or MEL. According to McMillan, some planes may legally operate without on-board weather radar, for example. Some planes might not even be GPS-equipped, especially if they're flying over land where getting lost is unlikely. Given the rarity of plane crashes, and the fact the black box data recorders are almost invariably recovered, it is unlikely that streaming black box technology would be implemented on a wide scale anytime soon.

"This is nothing new. Every time something bad happens, people come up with an untenable idea for a technological fix or an equipment fix," says Aboulafia. "These are three tragic anecdotes, but the plural of anecdote is not data."

"It tests the waters and provides some understanding of these systems. Also, from a political standpoint, it helps address some of the concerns in Congress about the ability of U.S. companies to really address this market," said Philip Finnegan, director of corporate analysis at the Teal Group, a leading aerospace and defense market analysis company. "It's a way of providing an interim step before you go out and do the final rule. And the final rule is going to take a long time."

One of the most troublesome issues the FAA must address in its final rule is to outline the differences between using a drone for commercial purposes versus solely for recreation, and then to police drone operators accordingly.

Under current law, for instance, it is technically legal to equip a drone with a camera and snap pictures of a scenic countryside. Selling those pictures, however, is not allowed.

Ironically, that system may have created a situation in which the most responsible operators can't use drones legally while the most irresponsible can.

"It's going to be very difficult for the FAA to control this. Part of the problem is there are severe restrictions on the commercial operation of these, and a lot of those people would be the most responsible," Mr. Finnegan said. "When it comes to hobbyists — no training, dim awareness of the risks — there is very little in terms of limitations. It's a serious, serious problem."