A Vertical Look at UAV Connectivity in the Wild: Cellular vs. Starlink, 3D Characterization, and Performance Prediction

Abstract

In this paper, we present an open-source measurement platform designed to characterize the performance of commercial cellular (Verizon, a major US provider) and LEO satellite (Starlink) networks through real-world flight tests in rural environments. We implement a comprehensive multi-layer measurement approach spanning physical layer signal metrics, multi-cell network topology, and end-to-end (E2E) application performance. Through an extensive flight campaign with more than 10 flight tests, 4.5+ hours of flight time resulting in more than 18K samples, we present the first detailed, open-source dataset analyzing dual cellular and Starlink performance for low-altitude UAV operations. Our cellular-Starlink comparative results, which are collected simultaneously at the same time and location, demonstrate significant performance differences between the two technologies: the LEO satellite link achieves superior latency performance with 95\% of Round-Trip Time (RTT) measurements below 50 ms compared to 80\% under 150 ms for cellular, and exceptional downlink capacity with 95\% exceeding 25 Mbps versus only 5 Mbps for cellular. Our analysis on cellular network performance demonstrates that while higher altitudes (e.g., 330+ m above the sea level) improve signal power by 15-20 dB via line-of-sight (LOS) propagation, it causes a 3-4 × increase in handover rates, which is due to excessive multi-cell visibility rather than signal degradation. Furthermore, we observe asymmetric impacts on the RTT performance due to handovers such that 53.5\% of handovers improve RTT, but worst-case degradation (275 ms) is 2 × larger than best-case improvement (137 ms).

0

Turn this paper into a full lesson

ArcXiv compiles a staged curriculum from this paper: 8-12 lessons across beginner → advanced, synthesised section guides, visuals, flashcards, a quiz, exercises, and on-demand deep dives per section. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…