Blog Archives | Ground Control

Every time your phone pings “You have arrived”, it’s easy to forget that satellites, atomic clocks and radio beams are doing the heavy lifting. For decades, GPS has been the quiet backbone of modern life, powering navigation, synchronizing telecom networks, and enabling aviation, shipping and defense operations to function effectively. But GPS dependence is starting to look fragile.

Over the last few years, the world has seen an alarming rise in deliberate GPS jamming and spoofing. In 2024, over 1,000 commercial flights a day were affected by GPS spoofing, and this is not an isolated trend. There’s growing awareness that single-source dependence on GNSS/GPS is a strategic vulnerability. The increase of jamming and spoofing incidents has sparked growing concern that GPS manipulation could be exploited for strategic or economic gain, prompting the United Nations to call for stronger safeguards against GPS satellite interference. Aviation, shipping and defense organizations need a practical, deployable alternative now – and a plan for a layered approach in the future – because the real question isn’t if GPS will fail, but what we’ll do when it does.

The Threat of Jamming and Spoofing

Put in simple terms, “jamming” means drowning satellite signals with noise so receivers can’t hear the real thing, and “spoofing” feeds false satellite signals to trick receivers into believing they’re somewhere they’re not.

Deliberate jamming and spoofing incidents are rising in aviation, commercial shipping and defense, and the consequences are no longer hypothetical. In the Baltic Sea and Gulf of Finland, reports of jamming and spoofing incidents rose from 1,225 affected shipping vessels in Q1 of 2025, to more than 5,800 affected vessels in Q2 – a 127% increase. Six years ago, in 2019, commercial vessels operating in Chinese ports around Shanghai, reported widespread GPS anomalies. Ships experienced sudden changes in reported positions, with some appearing to move erratically or vanish from tracking systems. Investigations revealed that these anomalies were due to GPS spoofing attacks which affected hundreds of vessels and disrupted port operations.

Fast forward to this year, and the Nordic and Baltic nations, including Finland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, repeatedly warned about greater electronic interference from Russia disrupting communications with planes, ships and drones. In September of this year, a plane carrying European Union chief Ursula von der Leyen was forced to land in Bulgaria using paper maps after its GPS navigation systems were jammed.

These incidents alone underscore the growing vulnerability of global navigation systems and highlight the need for stronger safeguards against electronic interference in critical transportation and defense sectors.

When GPS fails in Aviation, Maritime and Defense

Aviation

Pilots trained for instrument and visual flight can be thrown off by unexpected and simultaneous navigation outages, increasing their workload and collision risk. Backup procedures exist, but they’re not designed to be the daily mode of operation for crowded airspace. The paper-maps incident is the most dramatic recent example.

Maritime

Ships relying on GNSS for route-keeping, port approaches and timing can find themselves off-course, with harbours and piloting services especially vulnerable to confusion and delays. The reports from high-traffic sea lanes and hotspots show repeated interference episodes.

Defense

Forces that depend on GPS for precision timing, targeting, and coordination face serious operational risks when signals are lost or deceived. Spoofed locations can misdirect assets, disrupt command-and-control links, or mask adversary movements. In contested environments, situational awareness can also erode rapidly, turning trusted digital navigation into a potential liability.

The Hybrid Navigation Future

With reliance on GPS across aviation, commercial shipping, and defense sectors, concerns about vulnerability to jamming, spoofing, and system outages have driven efforts to explore more resilient navigation technologies. A range of emerging solutions is shaping the future of Assured Positioning, Navigation, and Timing (A-PNT). Each alternative offers strengths and limitations, highlighting the likelihood that the future of navigation will depend on a hybrid mix rather than a single replacement for GPS.

1. Multi-constellation GNSS

Utilizing signals from multiple satellite systems increases redundancy and complicates blanket jamming – but it doesn’t solve targeted spoofing.

2. Inertial navigation systems (INS) and sensor fusion

High-grade inertial measurement units (IMUs) combined with map-matching can bridge gaps for short to medium durations. Classical INS drifts over time however, unless tightly integrated with GNSS to bound drift, and high-performance INS can be expensive.

3. eLORAN (terrestrial low-frequency radio)

eLORAN is a modernized terrestrial radio navigation system that can provide wide area PNT and is much harder to jam at scale. The UK’s Ministry of Defence is focusing its alternative positioning, navigation and timing (Alt PNT) initiative on developing “a proposal for a resilient, terrestrial, and sovereign Enhanced Long-Range Navigation (eLORAN) system to provide backup position and navigation.” In the proposal stage only, the reintroduction and deployment of eLORAN is not currently an active system for GPS resilience.

4. Quantum and advanced sensing

Quantum sensors – notably atom interferometers, quantum magnetometers and other quantum-enabled instruments – can measure motion, gravity or magnetic anomalies with extremely high precision, potentially enabling navigation without satellite signals for hours. Last year, Boeing completed the first recorded flight using quantum navigation systems to navigate across the central United States for four hours without GPS. These technologies are not available outside of testing yet, but could be an option for navigation independent of GPS in the future.

5. Assured Positioning, Navigation and Timing (A-PNT)

Unlike GNSS satellites in Medium Earth Orbit (MEO), Iridium satellites transmit PNT signals from Low Earth Orbit (LEO) that are approximately 1,000 times stronger than GPS signals, allowing them to penetrate buildings and other hard-to-reach areas. The Iridium PNT service also incorporates cryptographic authentication to protect against spoofing and tampering. Thus, unauthorized or falsified signals are rejected, ensuring that systems operate only on trusted information. To harness Iridium PNT, organizations will need compatible receivers, firmware updates and integration with existing PNT stacks. However, that effort is still easier and faster today than building a whole eLORAN network or replacing INS suites.

Diagram of RockBLOCK APNT in Maritime Application

After appraising what’s available today, Iridium’s PNT service for A-PNT stands out as the most immediate, practical, and deployable mitigation to GPS jamming and spoofing. Drawing on our experience designing and building A-PNT hardware that leverages this service, we see it as a realistic option organizations can adopt now, not just a concept on the horizon.

It’s important to note, however, that A-PNT is not a full replacement for every GPS/GNSS function. While Iridium PNT excels in providing trusted timing and “truth” signals that help detect spoofing or restore receiver integrity, some high-precision positioning applications (such as sub-decimeter RTK-level GNSS for surveying) will continue to depend on multi-constellation GNSS and augmentation for the foreseeable future. For that reason, both the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and leading industry bodies advocate a layered approach to GPS resilience.

Iridium PNT:

Is already trusted by defense and commercial sectors
Delivers stronger LEO signals than GNSS MEO signals
Delivers hard-to-jam signals with cryptographic techniques
Is in deployment now, commercially available, and expanding.

A Layered Approach for Future GPS Resiliency

GPS reshaped modern life and will remain vital to everyday navigation and positioning, so the right answer isn’t to replace GPS, but complement it with A-PNT. Jamming and spoofing incidents are real, growing, and in some regions, weaponized. The future of resilient navigation is a hybrid one – multiple GNSS constellations, A-PNT, and in the years to come, hardened terrestrial systems like eLORAN and robust inertial/quantum sensors.

From commercial aviation to maritime shipping, military operations to critical infrastructure, reliance on a single GNNS/GPS source exposes organizations to jamming, spoofing, and unexpected interference. The examples of disrupted flights, misreported vessel locations, and spoofed navigation systems highlight its vulnerabilities.

A layered approach to PNT is essential. Among these, Iridium PNT stands out as an immediate, resilient solution. APNT provides critical timing and location integrity that organizations can rely on while building a more comprehensive layered system. Together, those layers can make sure “You have arrived” stays true, even when someone tries to move you off course.

Connecting Assets and Operations Beyond GPS

Building resilient A-PNT into our operations isn’t about replacing GPS, it’s about ensuring confidence when GPS can’t be trusted.

With over 20 years of experience, we’re a satellite-enabled solutions partner you can trust to implement technology that safeguards your aviation, maritime, and defense operations and for secure, real time data transmission wherever your journey takes you.

If you’d like to know more about our APNT solutions, our team can help you. Email hello@groundcontrol.com or complete the form, and we’ll be in touch within one working day.

Ground Control has joined the CLS Group, a global leader in satellite-based monitoring and connectivity. Together, we bring decades of experience and a shared commitment to connecting people, places, and assets in the world’s most challenging environments.

CLS has been developing space-based technologies for nearly forty years. Their work helps governments, scientists, and industries protect and manage the planet’s resources. With 1,100 people across 35 locations worldwide, CLS combines satellite data, IoT connectivity, and advanced analytics to deliver insights that guide critical decisions.

Ground Control designs rugged devices like RockBLOCK 9704 and RockREMOTE Mini, and powers them with Cloudloop, our secure platform for managing devices and data. Our customers depend on us for mission-critical communications in sectors ranging from renewable energy to disaster response. By joining CLS, we gain access to greater resources and reach, enabling us to accelerate innovation and serve our customers better.

This partnership also strengthens our combined offering. Together, we can provide truly end-to-end solutions: hardware, global connectivity, and the data platforms needed to turn information into action. For example, a single project might now use CLS satellites to track environmental changes, Ground Control hardware to gather sensor data, and Cloudloop to manage and deliver that data to decision-makers.

“Joining CLS is a natural evolution for Ground Control,” says Alastair MacLeod, CEO of Ground Control. “Together, we offer end-to-end solutions – hardware, connectivity, platform, and support – with enhanced global reach through local representation and shared environmental values.”

Stéphanie Limouzin, President of CLS Group, adds, “Combining CLS’s space-based IoT services with Ground Control’s robust hardware and cloud platforms makes perfect sense. This move will allow us to better serve our clients with enhanced proximity, agility, and a broader portfolio of tools adapted to their operational environments.”

Ground Control will continue to operate under its own brand, with the same focus on reliable connectivity and customer service. With CLS’s global scale and environmental mission behind us, we’re ready to create new opportunities for our customers and help shape a more connected, sustainable future.

Ground Control was advised by HCR (legal) and IAGC (financial), while CLS was advised by Capital Law (UK) and Meister Seelig & Fein (USA).

About CLS Group

CLS is a global company dedicated to using space-based technologies to understand and protect our planet. Headquartered in Toulouse, France, CLS has been a pioneer in satellite-based monitoring and connectivity for nearly forty years. With more than 1,100 people across 35 locations worldwide, the company works at the intersection of science, technology, and sustainability.

CLS focuses on five key areas: environmental monitoring, maritime surveillance, sustainable fisheries management, mobility, and energy and infrastructure monitoring. Every day, CLS processes vast amounts of satellite and IoT data to help governments, NGOs, and industries make informed decisions that balance operational needs with the stewardship of natural resources.

Learn More About CLS

Get in touch

Ground Control has entered an exciting new chapter as part of the CLS Group, and we look forward to sharing more about what this partnership will mean in the months ahead. If you have questions about the news, our solutions, or how we can support your organization, we’d love to hear from you.

Use the form below to get in touch. You can also email us directly at hello@groundcontrol.com – our team is ready to help.

Satellite IoT is no longer a niche. According to Berg Insight’s latest Satellite IoT Communications Market report, the global subscriber base surpassed 5.8 million connections in 2024 and is forecast to reach 32.5 million by 2029 – a compound annual growth rate of more than 41%. Revenues are expected to grow in parallel, from €334 million in 2024 to nearly €1.6 billion in 2029, even as the average monthly ARPU drops to €4.05.

That growth is being driven by demand from industries operating far beyond terrestrial coverage, agriculture, maritime, energy, construction, transportation, and government among them. With only about 10% of the Earth’s surface covered by terrestrial connectivity, satellite IoT is filling the gap and unlocking new applications at scale.

Against this backdrop of rapid expansion, Ground Control set out to understand which emerging forces satellite IoT users themselves believe will most shape their industries in the next 2-3 years. We surveyed 211 professionals across Defense, Utilities, Telecommunications, Maritime, Environmental Monitoring, Engineering, and more, asking them a simple but important question:

“Which emerging trends do you think will shape your industry the most over the next 2–3 years?”

The results reveal five powerful forces – some already in motion, others still emerging – that will define the next phase of satellite IoT. You can download the full Ground Control 2026 Satellite IoT Outlook eBook for the complete analysis, but here’s a snapshot of what we found.

Read 2026 Trends Report

45%

See security & resilience in IoT as the top priority

45%

Expect next-gen proprietary services to shape operations

56%

Of Asian respondents say AI will influence their industry

Key Insights from the Report

1. Security and Resilience

45% of respondents highlighted security and resilience as their top concern. With GPS jamming and spoofing incidents rising in both aviation and maritime sectors, resilience is no longer optional. It extends beyond navigation to cover networks, supply chains, and architectures that underpin critical operations.

Governments are responding too. In the UK, for example, new investments in resilient space-based services highlight how security is being treated as both an economic and national security priority.

The takeaway? Security is moving from being a specialist consideration to a mainstream business imperative for anyone using satellite IoT.

2. Next Generation Proprietary Services

45% of users anticipate next generation proprietary services like Iridium Messaging Transport (IMT) and Viasat IoT Nano (OGx) will influence their work. Unlike older SBD or IDP services, these platforms allow for larger, more cost efficient messages, enabling richer telemetry and new use cases.

And while some might assume that the rise of standards-based NTN IoT could threaten these established proprietary services, Iridium itself takes a different view. Speaking earlier this year, Iridium’s SVP of Product Management, Greg Aziz, explained that the company’s IoT business is highly diversified and that established services will continue to have a long life:

“People think it’s just IoT, but we’re going to use that protocol to operate on consumer devices as well … We’re very diversified and we don’t see these [established] businesses shrinking or going anywhere over the next several years.”

In other words, Iridium views NTN NB-IoT as an incremental growth opportunity – a slice of its broader strategy, not a disruptive threat to its existing services. For IoT users, this means confidence that current proprietary services remain stable and reliable, while also being enhanced by new capabilities.

3. New Mega Constellations

39% of respondents flagged mega constellations, including Starlink and Kuiper, as a potential influence. These networks are being built first and foremost to extend mobile and broadband coverage, not to serve ultra-low power IoT sensors.

Take Starlink’s Direct-to-Cell (D2C) initiative: the system enables text, calling, and browsing via satellite directly to standard LTE phones, effectively acting like a space-based cell tower. Early rollout focuses on texting and basic location features, with voice and data functionality being rolled out later. The target use cases are consumer – cars, smartphones, rural coverage – rather than custom IoT deployments.

That context matters. While mega constellations carry potential, their current architecture, marketing, and immediate value align more closely with consumer connectivity than the needs of industrial IoT. For IoT users, this reinforces the importance of designing around specialized satellite services built for sensor data, rather than expecting these consumer networks to fill all roles down the line.

4. Standards-Based Satellite IoT (D2D)

Just over a third of respondents (35%) see standards-based Direct to Device (D2D) as an emerging influence. By using cellular protocols such as NB-IoT and LTE in non-terrestrial networks (NTN), devices can connect to satellites with a single SIM and existing cellular standards.

Pipeline highlights how this model could simplify deployments and cut costs for large scale, latency tolerant applications. Still, this isn’t a universal fit. Data constraints, message frequency limits, and current gaps in global coverage mean NTN NB-IoT is best for price sensitive, scale driven use cases, not for critical real time monitoring.

5. AI and the Value of IoT Data

AI was the least selected force in our survey (24%), but that doesn’t undermine its relevance. As IoT Business News reported, billions in AI investment could be undermined if organizations can’t ensure reliable IoT connectivity.

AI adoption is accelerating, and Asia leads the way: 56% of respondents in the region expect it to reshape their operations, compared to just 20% in Europe and 21% in North America.

The lesson? AI will increasingly separate leaders from laggards, but success will depend on the quality, accuracy, and architecture of IoT data; not AI in isolation.

If your organization relies on satellite IoT for critical operations, the choices you make over the next 2-3 years will shape your resilience, efficiency, and competitiveness. The landscape is evolving quickly, from the rise of next generation proprietary services to the promises of standards-based NTN, alongside the growing importance of security, AI, and mega constellations.

Our comprehensive report provides the insights and strategies you need to:

Understand the top priorities of IoT users worldwide, including why security and resilience now top the agenda.
Evaluate emerging technologies like NTN NB-IoT and AI, and see where they fit (and where they don’t) in critical operations.
See how adoption differs by region and industry, and benchmark your own strategy against your peers.
Gain clarity on mega constellations; what they mean for consumers today, and why IoT users should focus on stability and reliability.

Download the full report now to discover how satellite IoT is changing, and how your organization can stay secure, resilient, and ready for the future.

Read Report

Can we help?

If you’d like tailored advice on strengthening your remote IoT infrastructure and architecture, we’re here to help.

Our team at Ground Control works with organizations across defense, utilities, maritime, and more to design secure, resilient, and future-ready connectivity strategies.

Get in touch to discuss your IoT challenges and opportunities; either complete the form or email hello@groundcontrol.com and we’ll respond within one working day.

Pipelines stretch thousands of miles, transporting oil, gas, water, and chemicals across diverse terrains, including mountainous areas, deserts, and offshore waters. They are essential infrastructure, but monitoring such vast and inaccessible pipeline networks presents a unique challenge and when leaks or failures go undetected, the consequences can be severe to both the pipeline operators and the environment.

Satellite-enabled IoT is an increasingly viable solution. By linking sensors directly to a global network of satellites, operators can achieve 24/7 data monitoring with zero dependance on terrestrial networks. With satellite IoT, pipeline operators can continuously monitor pipeline health, detect anomalies in real time, predict maintenance needs, and even act remotely to prevent minor issues from becoming costly disasters. Pipelines will always cross remote places, but with satellite IoT, those places no longer have to be blind spots.

Here’s why pipeline health monitoring is critical, and how selecting the right satellite IoT network and device – from low power sensors to real time control systems – can help operators protect remote infrastructure and prevent costly failures.

Why Remote Pipelines Need Satellite IoT

Traditional pipeline monitoring methods rely heavily on cellular networks or fixed wired systems. Both approaches work well where infrastructure is dense and coverage is consistent, but pipelines rarely follow such convenient paths. They cross deserts, mountain ranges, wetlands, and offshore environments where terrestrial coverage is patchy at best and, in many cases, does not exist at all. Wired systems, meanwhile, are expensive to install and maintain over long distances, particularly where terrain is unstable or hostile.

Coverage gaps create serious risks, as even a small leak in an isolated section of pipeline can go undetected for days, releasing oil, gas, or chemicals into the surrounding environment. In many cases, this not only carries the cost of remediation but also heavy regulatory penalties and reputational damage. Even when problems are eventually identified, the time lost between the first failure and the response often magnifies the scale of the incident.

Unplanned downtime is another consequence of limited pipeline monitoring. When equipment fails without warning, operators are forced to take entire sections of pipeline offline while they diagnose and repair the issue. This is disruptive and costly, especially in industries where margins depend on continuous flow. Coverage gaps also limit the effectiveness of predictive maintenance, forcing operators to rely on scheduled inspections or reactive repairs that drive up costs and increase vulnerability.

Further, there are safety implications. When a fault occurs in a remote environment, personnel are dispatched into difficult and sometimes hazardous conditions with limited information about what awaits them. This not only puts people at risk, but it also slows the time to resolution. Ultimately, terrestrial connectivity is not sufficient to monitor, manage, and ensure pipeline and personnel health in the mostremote areas.

The Cost of Connectivity Gaps in Pipeline Monitoring

In March 2006, more than 200,000 gallons of crude oil spilled onto the Alaskan tundra from BP’s Prudhoe Bay pipeline; the largest oil spill ever recorded on the North Slope at the time. Investigators traced the leak to a ¼-inch hole caused by internal corrosion in a section of pipeline that had not been inspected for years. With limited monitoring in this remote environment, the corrosion went undetected until it caused a catastrophic failure. The consequences were immediate: U.S. domestic oil production dropped by nearly eight percent, cleanup costs ran into the hundreds of millions, and regulators imposed heavy fines.

A similar pattern has played out elsewhere. In 2017, a crude oil pipeline in India ruptured along a hidden seam defect despite having undergone periodic inline inspections. Without continuous monitoring, the defect went unnoticed between inspection intervals, ultimately leading to a major spill and disruption to local communities and infrastructure.

These cases illustrate how gaps in visibility – whether caused by lack of network coverage or the limits of periodic inspections – can turn slow-building problems into headline-grabbing disasters. In remote areas where traditional cellular or wired networks simply don’t reach, operators are left to rely on sporadic checks, leaving too much room for failure.

How Satellite IoT Bridges The Connectivity Gap

Satellite IoT bridges the connectivity gap in pipeline monitoring, eliminates blind spots, and addresses pipeline vulnerabilities. Here’s how:

1. Detecting Anomalies Before They Escalate

The earliest signs of issues within a pipeline can be subtle – a slight pressure drop, a shift in temperature, or a vibration outside normal range can all indicate the beginning of a leak, corrosion, or interference. Continuous sensing makes these small deviations visible, but visibility is only useful if the data can reach operators without delay.

In regions with reliable terrestrial networks, that flow of data is relatively straightforward. In remote terrain, a sensor may detect a problem, but without connectivity, the information stays in the field. By the time operators and inspectors reach the pipeline, days may have passed and a minor leak may have spread into soil, waterways, or communities. The result is a much larger clean-up, higher costs, and often regulatory scrutiny. This is where satellite IoT changes the equation. Data from remote sensors is transmitted securely from any location on Earth with a clear view of the sky. Operators have complete visibility in near real time and can act on the first sign of irregularity.

2. Predictive Maintenance with Data Intelligence

Pipelines and their supporting equipment degrade gradually over time; bearings loosen, pumps vibrate, and valves begin to stick. If these changes go undetected, the first sign of trouble may be a breakdown, forcing operators to react after the fact by dispatching crews to remote locations at short notice and losing valuable supply time. Research shows that failures in critical components like bearings and pumps are among the leading causes of unplanned downtime in industrial systems, particularly when early warning data are scarce.

In areas without reliable connectivity, operators often rely on fixed inspection schedules, replacing components whether they need it or not, or worse, leaving them in place too long, which raises the risk of failure. This approach means maintenance decisions are based on limited information rather than real time insights into the pipeline’s actual condition, a problem well documented in studies of condition-based maintenance and industrial IoT. As a result, organizations remain stuck in a reactive cycle, facing higher costs and greater operational vulnerability.

Satellite-enabled predictive maintenance works differently. By streaming live sensor data into analytical systems, operators can recognize patterns that signal when a component is beginning to deteriorate. A pump running hotter than usual, or a valve that opens more slowly than before, triggers an automated early warning. Pipeline maintenance teams can then be dispatched to service the specific section of pipeline that needs maintenance, at the right time, rather than covering hundreds of miles in search of faults that may or may not exist.

Satellite IoT makes this approach viable even in the most remote environments. Reliable, global satellite coverage ensures that predictive platforms always receive the data they require, so operators are no longer forced to choose between over-servicing their pipelines and risking unexpected failure. They can maintain only what requires intervention, extend the lifespan of their assets, and minimise downtime. This leads to safer operations, more cost-effective maintenance, and fewer unexpected failures.

3. Monitoring and Control from Afar

Detecting issues in pipeline health is only half the battle. As most pipelines stretch across some of the most inaccessible terrain on earth and beyond cellular reach, operators are forced to rely on field teams reaching the site before remedial action can take place, and that delay can be costly. A leak may continue unchecked for hours or days and valuable time can be lost while crews travel long distances with limited information about any issues.

Satellite IoT enables remote actuation, allowing pipeline operators to send commands instantly to equipment in the field, closing valves, adjusting pumps, or isolating sections of pipe as soon as a problem is detected. A pressure sensor signalling a sudden drop can trigger an immediate response from the control room, instead of waiting for a maintenance team to drive or fly to a remote location. The technology not only directly reduces the scale of spills but also shortens downtime and improves safety for field personnel. Pipeline engineers are no longer dispatched into hazardous conditions to perform urgent manual interventions and instead, they can attend the site to carry out targeted repairs under safer, more controlled circumstances.

Without satellite-enabled actuation, pipeline operators remain vulnerable to longer response times and escalating incidents in remote regions. With it, they gain the ability to contain risks immediately, keeping both pipeline infrastructure and the surrounding environment safer.

Choosing the Right Satellite IoT Solution

Every pipeline is different. The right connectivity depends on how much data you need to transmit, how often you need to send it, and how critical it is to have immediate, two way communication. Here’s a quick guide to help you decide where to start.

For Low Data Volumes and Periodic Updates: NTN NB-IoT

If your sensors only need to send small packets of data, and the problem won’t escalate if readings are sent a few times per day (e.g., 8-12 transmissions), NTN NB-IoT is a cost-effective option.

Best for environmental monitoring, slow changing metrics like temperature, pressure, or flow trends, and non-critical maintenance data.

It’s important to remember that this is emerging technology, and coverage is still expanding, so availability varies by region. Further, because the service is currently delivered by Viasat, whose satellites are in Geostationary orbit, sensors need direct line of sight to the satellite, which can be a challenge in heavily forested or mountainous terrain.

Our recommendation is RockBLOCK RTU; designed for ultra-low power consumption and long term field deployments, making it an ideal choice for pipelines using NTN NB-IoT connectivity. It’s a flexible device that can also operate on cellular where available, and can be shipped with Iridium Short Burst Data (SBD) as an alternative satellite network, if your pipeline is not within the coverage area of the NTN NB-IoT service.

For Higher Data Volumes or More Frequent Reporting: Iridium Messaging Transport (IMT)

When your pipeline monitoring requires more frequent updates or larger data volumes, Iridium Messaging Transport (IMT) is the better fit. Its truly global coverage ensures connectivity even in the most remote environments, while its sub-10-second round-trip time makes it suitable for near real-time applications.

This is ideal for continuous health monitoring of pumps, valves, and sensors, early warning systems where immediate alerts are crucial, and remote assets that are inaccessible for long periods.

IMT supports more frequent transmissions than NTN NB-IoT and can handle a higher data load, making it ideal for situations where small, periodic updates simply aren’t enough.

Our device recommendations would be RockBLOCK Pro or RockBLOCK Plus 9704 – rugged, field-ready devices built to withstand extreme conditions and provide reliable, low power operation for continuous monitoring.

For Real Time Monitoring and Remote Control: IP-Based Solutions

For mission-critical sites where you need to both monitor and act instantly, an IP-based solution is essential. These systems enable real time, two way communication, so operators can remotely command equipment, such as closing valves or isolating sections of pipe the moment a fault is detected.

Best for critical infrastructure nodes, emergency response situations, and high value assets where downtime costs are severe.

Powered by Iridium Certus 100, these solutions deliver global coverage with very low latency, enabling near-instant response. Choose RockREMOTE Mini for a rugged tough, IP-based device which is optimized for low power draw, or RockREMOTE Rugged to take advantage of its sophisticated edge processing capabilities, and MQTT / FTP facades.

Satellite IoT gives pipeline operators the tools to see, predict, and act, even in the most remote environments. By matching the right technology to each monitoring challenge, operators can prevent minor issues from becoming disasters, safeguard their teams, and protect the environment. With the right strategy, every mile of pipeline can be monitored and managed with confidence, no matter how far it stretches.

Can we help?

Partner with us to implement satellite IoT technology that safeguards your critical infrastructure and pipeline operations.

Complete the form or email us at hello@groundcontrol.com and we’ll get back to you within one working day.

Drones are no longer futuristic novelties. They’re already saving lives, cutting emissions, and driving efficiency across industries as diverse as healthcare, energy, and infrastructure.

The ability to fly Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) is critical to unlocking these benefits at scale. Without BVLOS, most missions are limited to the operator’s direct line of sight, constraining both range and impact. With BVLOS, drones can cross oceans, inspect thousands of miles of pipeline, and deliver life saving supplies to remote communities.

But for BVLOS to be safe and effective, drones must maintain reliable, unbroken connectivity. And that’s where the challenge begins.

The Comms Reality Check

However, relying solely on terrestrial networks for drone connectivity can be a risky proposition, especially for BVLOS missions.

1. Vulnerability to inference and jamming

In contested or hostile environments, terrestrial links are vulnerable to deliberate interference or jamming. For example, during the conflict in Ukraine, both commercial LTE and unlicensed radio links have been targeted and disrupted, grounding entire fleets of drones and illustrating how fragile these systems can be when faced with intentional electronic warfare. Even in peacetime, terrestrial systems are not immune to accidental interference; for instance, at large sporting events or urban centers where multiple devices compete for spectrum, drones can lose connection at critical moments.

2. Coverage gaps in rural and offshore areas

Coverage is another major challenge. LTE and 5G networks work well in cities, but in rural or offshore areas, coverage gaps are common. This creates real problems for industries like pipeline inspection or offshore wind maintenance, where drones must operate hundreds of kilometers from the nearest tower.

3. Network failures during disasters

Even where coverage exists, networks can fail under stress: in natural disasters such as hurricanes or wildfires, cellular towers are often damaged or overloaded. For instance, during Hurricane Ian (2022), parts of Florida experienced complete cellular blackouts, leaving first responders unable to rely on mobile networks.

4. Technical limitations

Long missions also introduce technical issues like handover failures when a drone crosses between towers – a known problem for high speed UAVs flying over mixed terrain. Finally, legacy aviation bands like VHF are limited to strict Line of Sight, making them unsuitable for missions that span mountains, forests, or the open ocean.

The bottom line is that the only truly global, always-on network is in space. For many BVLOS missions, satellite connectivity is the primary link for safe command and control (C2). In other cases, it’s a failover that ensures uninterrupted operations if the primary terrestrial link drops or fails.

Choosing the Right Connectivity

The table below outlines the strengths and weaknesses of the most common BVLOS connectivity options.

	Direct RF (LoS)	Cellular (4G/5G)	LEO Satellite (e.g., Iridium)	GEO Satellite (e.g., Viasat)	Mesh / Relay Networks	Hybrid (e.g., LTE + Satcom)
Range	Low-Mid (20–30 km)	High - wherever towers exist	Global (with constellation coverage)	Global, exc. poles	Variable - range extends hop by hop	Global with redundancy
Latency	Very Low (ms)	Low - Moderate (20-100 ms)	Moderate (270-400 ms)	High (~500–600 ms)*	Moderate (depends on hops)	Low - Moderate
Coverage	Limited - range depends on altitude and obstructions	Urban/suburban areas, gaps in rural/remote regions	Requires clear view of the sky - partial blockage from terrain, buildings, or canopy can cause dropouts	Requires continuous line of sight to the geostationary satellite - signal can be blocked by mountains, cliffs, or large offshore structures	Customizable - requires supporting nodes or relay drones	Global - seamless failover between links
Cost	Low	Moderate	High	High	Medium - High	High
Ideal Use Case	Close range inspections, small scale BVLOS in open terrain	Urban delivery, public safety, mapping	Remote BVLOS missions needing high bandwidth: offshore energy, maritime inspections, remote mining	Long endurance flights where latency is less critical: pipeline patrol, wilderness operations	Disaster response, temporary missions in areas with no infrastructure	Safety-critical commercial BVLOS, mixed terrain missions

*Viasat doesn’t publicly publish a detailed latency spec comparable to Iridium Certus 100’s 270-400 ms. From flight demos, we know it supports reliable command & control when terrestrial links fail, but the reported latency for video stream fallback and link reversion suggests it is likely in the hundreds of milliseconds range rather than tens of milliseconds. Until more data is published, this is a reasonable working assumption.

LEO vs GEO: Understanding the Differences

Satellites are positioned in either Low Earth Orbit (LEO), Medium Earth Orbit (MEO), or Geostationary orbit (GEO). Our blog post on Satellite Orbit Heights provides a more detailed explanation, but to summarise, the closer the satellite network is to Earth, the lower the latency – the time it takes for data to travel from the drone, to the orbiting satellite, and down to the ground station (from where it’s routed to the drone operator’s system). Latency is a key attribute for UAV operators looking for as close to real-time command and control as possible, so it’s worth reviewing LEO satellite networks such as Iridium, Starlink or OneWeb.

Satellite Orbit Heights Diagram 2024

Another consideration is where your drone will be operating. If you are connecting to a satellite in Geostationary orbit, such as Viasat, the satellite remains in the same location overhead, and you need “line of sight” to that satellite. This works very well in wide open spaces, but if the signal could be blocked by infrastructure or mountains, for example, it’s not the best choice. Satellites in Low Earth Orbit need a “clear view of the sky”, but because the satellites are in motion overhead, rather than in a fixed point, it’s less rigid than GEO services. Read more about what’s meant by a clear view of the sky.

Also, consider the practicalities of hardware and power consumption when choosing between LEO and GEO networks. Terminals designed for LEO services are often smaller and lighter, making them well suited to drones where every gram matters and battery life is at a premium. Because these satellites are closer to Earth, they can typically operate at lower power levels, which helps maximize flight endurance. GEO terminals, while still compact, may draw more power and require slightly larger antennas to maintain a continuous connection with a single, fixed satellite.

Ultimately, the decision isn’t just about latency or coverage. It’s about balancing responsiveness, operating environment, and hardware constraints to select the right orbit for the mission. Whether it’s low-latency LEO for real-time control or the stable, wide-area coverage of GEO for long-range operations, matching the satellite architecture to the needs of the drone is key to safe and reliable BVLOS flight anywhere on Earth.

Hybrid Strategies: Best of Both Worlds

Whether you choose LEO for responsiveness or GEO for stability, no single connectivity method can cover every scenario perfectly. The most resilient BVLOS operations don’t rely on a single link at all; instead, they use a hybrid strategy, combining multiple communications paths to ensure that control of the aircraft is never lost, no matter what happens in the sky or on the ground.

A hybrid approach integrates multiple communication technologies, each serving a different role. This isn’t simply about adding a backup link; it’s about creating a system where the aircraft actively prioritizes and switches between links in real time, based on performance and availability.

At present, most commercial operators treat satellite as a failover link. Cellular and RF systems are used as the primary connection because they are cost effective and can handle large data streams such as live HD video or high-resolution sensor data. Satellite is kept in reserve as the safety net – the “final line of defense,” as Skylift UAV describes their use of the RockBLOCK 9603.

In their words, the satellite module provides the confidence to continue operating safely in the unlikely event of a complete communications blackout. This model works well for urban and suburban missions where cellular coverage is strong, or for flights where Line of Sight RF can be maintained most of the time.

However, as BVLOS missions grow in range and complexity, this dynamic is beginning to shift. In rural or offshore environments, cellular coverage is unreliable or entirely absent, and Line of Sight radios quickly become impractical. In these contexts, satellite is increasingly moving from failover to primary link, especially for critical command and control traffic. For example, during recent flight tests, pilots reported that LTE video streams were prone to frequent dropouts at altitude, but satellite remained reliably stable throughout.

A hybrid approach requires intelligent link management. The drone must be able to segment traffic by type and seamlessly prioritize the best available link without pilot intervention. For example, during an offshore mission, a drone may begin by streaming video over LTE while using satellite for command and control in the background. As it moves further out to sea and loses cellular coverage, the satellite connection continues uninterrupted, ensuring no loss of control. Later, if the drone comes back into range, LTE automatically resumes for payload data, but satellite remains quietly handling the critical link in the background. From the operator’s perspective, these transitions should be invisible, with the system maintaining continuous awareness and control throughout.

Many regulatory frameworks now encourage or require operators to demonstrate redundancy, often by using two independent communications paths so that a single failure cannot compromise control of the aircraft. This level of resilience is essential for operations such as pipeline patrols, offshore deliveries, or disaster response, where losing connectivity could have serious safety, regulatory, or financial consequences.

With a hybrid strategy in place, the next step is to match the satellite service to the mission profile.

Matching Satellite Services to Missions

Before you pick a hardware or service, think about your data rates, power and weight constraints, and how critical your command and position links are. The table below shows two tiers of mission profiles, one for simple commands such as go to the nearest rally point, go home, or terminate the flight, and another for full BVLOS operations, with the attributes you should aim for in each.

Simple Commands (Light Missions)

Lightweight telemetry and commands only
Ultra low power draw, so maximal flight time
Small hardware footprint, minimal antenna gain
Reliable even in remote environments, rough terrain, trees, or sparse coverage

Full BVLOS Operations

Continuous, reliable command and control link
Command response delays kept under ~700 ms
Position updates as frequent as 1 second
Enables safe separation from other aircraft and scalable BVLOS flights across mixed terrain and range

Ground Control’s RockBLOCK devices are optimized for simple commands, where size, power, and reliability under constrained conditions are the top priorities. Meanwhile, our Iridium Certus 100-based offerings (e.g. RockREMOTE Mini OEM) are built for BVLOS missions that need higher throughput, frequent updates, and strong command responsiveness. Adjusting your satellite choice to the mission kind avoids over-engineering, keeps costs manageable, and ensures safety without carrying unnecessary weight or power burden.

The following devices all leverage the Iridium satellite network, chosen because it is in Low Earth Orbit, so has very low latency, and truly global coverage. It has been tried and tested over years of operation, and is extremely reliable and resilient.

Recommended Hardware

BVLOS drones are already proving their value across industries. In the UK, drones are delivering chemotherapy drugs to the Isle of Wight eight times faster than traditional transport, while in the offshore energy sector, companies like Skyports are replacing helicopter supply runs with drones, cutting emissions and reducing downtime. In the USA, long range drone patrols are helping to monitor thousands of miles of remote pipelines, and in the North Sea, offshore wind farms are being inspected in real time without costly, carbon intensive vessel missions.

Key Takeaways

When planning BVLOS operations, the priority should always be maintaining a reliable command and control link. Satellite connectivity is uniquely suited to this role because it offers consistent, global coverage that isn’t dependent on local infrastructure. Terrestrial networks such as LTE or RF can still play an important role, but they are best used for non-critical data like video streaming or payload telemetry rather than the core C2 function.

A hybrid approach delivers the best of both worlds. By combining satellite and terrestrial links intelligently, operators can use satellite for stable, predictable command and control while taking advantage of LTE or other networks for higher bandwidth data when coverage is available. This balance provides flexibility while keeping safety at the forefront.

Operational resilience comes from planning for failure. BVLOS systems should be designed with multiple communications paths and the ability to switch between them instantly, ensuring that connectivity is never lost if one link goes down. Continuous monitoring and rapid failover processes are essential to meeting safety and regulatory expectations as drone fleets grow in scale.

Finally, data management must not be overlooked. Tracking airtime, managing costs, and ensuring telemetry data is actionable are all key to running efficient, scalable operations. By keeping a close eye on data use and system performance, operators can make informed decisions that improve reliability and maximize return on investment.

Take Your BVLOS Operations Further

BVLOS connectivity doesn’t have to be a limiting factor. With the right mix of satellite and terrestrial links, your drones can stay connected and operational anywhere on Earth; from dense urban environments to the most remote locations.

Whether you need lightweight hardware for simple commands or a fully scalable solution for complex BVLOS missions, our team can help you design a system that’s safe, reliable, and ready to grow with your operations.

Email hello@groundcontrol.com or complete the form, and we’ll be in touch within one working day.

On September 4, 2025, we co-hosted a webinar on NTN NB-IoT Uncovered: What It Is, What It Isn’t, and Where It Wins with Viasat. This is emerging technology with a great deal of promise, and we had a large audience, with an accordingly large number of questions! We’ve collated these questions into several topics in this blog post, which we will keep updated as the roadmap progresses.

Quick Links:

Pricing and Licensing

What is the expected cost of hardware (e.g., modem, antenna)?

Hardware pricing varies widely depending on the capabilities your project requires. Some modules are designed purely as basic modems to connect to NTN NB-IoT networks and are relatively inexpensive, but they only provide connectivity.

Products like RockBLOCK RTU are far more than just a connection point. In addition to NTN NB-IoT access, they include:

Edge processing to handle data locally and reduce transmission frequency (saving airtime and battery life).
Configurable sensor reading and alerting, so you can trigger transmissions only when thresholds are met.
A plug-and-play design, enabling faster deployment and simpler integration with cloud platforms like Cloudloop.

Because of this added functionality, RockBLOCK RTU and similar devices sit at a different price point than a simple dongle, but they often reduce overall project costs by lowering airtime usage, extending battery life, and minimizing field maintenance.

In short, the “right” hardware investment depends on whether you need just connectivity or a complete field-ready solution that simplifies operations and scales with your project.

What will ongoing connectivity cost, for example at 50 KB per month or one transmission per hour?

Viasat has not yet published official NTN NB-IoT pricing, but early indications suggest it will be competitive for the specific niche of very small, infrequent data transmissions. Final rates are expected to be announced in Q1 2026.

Because of the complexity and scale of satellite infrastructure, NTN NB-IoT data will not follow the same pricing model as terrestrial NB-IoT. In practical terms, this means far less data for a higher cost, making it best suited to scenarios where devices send tiny payloads, such as tens of bytes per hour, rather than continuous data streams.

When compared to proprietary satellite services, NTN NB-IoT can be more cost effective for ultra-low data volumes (typically below 30-50 KB per month per device). This makes it a strong choice for applications like remote sensors, infrequent tracking, and metering.

Around 50 KB per month, message-based services like Iridium Messaging Transport (IMT) and NTN NB-IoT become roughly equivalent in cost.

Above 50 KB per month, proprietary services like IMT quickly become far more economical, especially for higher data throughput or near-real time applications.

In summary, NTN NB-IoT fills a valuable gap for low data, low power use cases, but it is not simply a continuation of cellular NB-IoT pricing in space. For higher data needs, traditional satellite services remain the better fit.

How does NTN NB-IoT communication cost compare to terrestrial NB-IoT and proprietary satellite solutions?

Satellite NB-IoT is designed for very small, infrequent data transmissions, such as a few tens of bytes per hour or day. Because of the complexity of delivering data over satellites, the cost per kilobyte is much higher than for terrestrial NB-IoT, which benefits from existing cellular infrastructure and is inexpensive for high volume, high frequency data.

For ultra-low data applications, Satellite NB-IoT promises to be more affordable than traditional proprietary satellite services, which are built for higher throughput, always-on connections. However, as data usage rises beyond roughly a few dozen kilobytes per month per device, the cost of satellite NB-IoT can quickly become more expensive, making other satellite solutions like Iridium Messaging Transport, or Viasat IoT Nano, more economical.

In short:

Terrestrial NB-IoT is the lowest cost option, but only works where there is cellular coverage.
Satellite NB-IoT fills the gap where coverage is missing, offering lower costs than legacy satellite services for small, infrequent messages.
Proprietary satellite solutions remain the best fit for higher data volumes, real time control, or truly global coverage.

Does the device include a subscription, and are any licenses required to use the service?

NTN NB-IoT works much like cellular IoT. Devices use a SIM card to authenticate on the network, and subscriptions are managed separately. These can be as short as one active month or discounted for 12 months or longer, depending on your needs.

No additional licenses are required as long as you are using a certified device. If you’re building your own hardware, it must first go through Viasat’s certification process before it can connect to the network.

Power Consumption

What are the expected power requirements for receiving and sending messages?

Final power profiles are still being confirmed, but early testing of devices shows very low power consumption, similar to cellular NB-IoT at the edge of coverage. Typical behavior is short, high-power bursts during transmission, with the device in deep sleep the rest of the time.

Transmit (TX): Brief bursts at a few hundred milliamps for fractions of a second per message.
Receive (RX): Much lower current for very short listening periods.
Deep Sleep: Extremely low standby current between events.

For ultra-low data use cases – such as one small (50-byte) message per day – battery life can be measured in years. Even at one message per hour, multi-year operation is still realistic with careful design, especially when payloads remain small, retries are minimized, and devices have a clear view of the sky.

Tip: Use short, infrequent messages and Non-IP Data Delivery (NIDD) where possible to maximize battery life.

Will latency in satellite NB-IoT significantly impact battery performance?

Not directly. Latency in satellite NB-IoT (typically tens of seconds) affects how long a device stays “awake” waiting for confirmation or downlink data, but it doesn’t require the radio to transmit continuously. Most of the time, the device is idle and consuming minimal power.

Where battery performance can be affected is in retry scenarios. If poor antenna placement or obstructions cause repeated failed attempts, the radio will need to re-send messages, increasing total energy used. This is why clear line of sight and well planned message scheduling are key.

For applications sending small, infrequent messages, latency has little impact on battery life, and multi-year operation remains realistic, even when end-to-end message delivery takes longer.

Data & Protocols

What counts as “small data volumes,” and how is data usage calculated (uplink vs downlink)?

For NTN NB-IoT, small data volumes generally mean 30-50 KB per month per device. This roughly equates to one small message (around 50 bytes) every hour, making it ideal for applications like periodic sensor readings or exception-based reporting.

Data usage is calculated as the total of both uplink and downlink traffic, combined.

Uplink: Data sent from the device, such as sensor readings or alerts.
Downlink: Data sent to the device, such as configuration updates or acknowledgements.

In most deployments, uplink traffic dominates, with only small amounts of downlink data needed. However, frequent acknowledgements or commands sent to the device will eat into the monthly budget, so it’s best to minimize downlink usage wherever possible.

Rule of thumb: If your device sends a 50-byte message hourly, you’ll be close to the 30-50 KB/month sweet spot, but adding regular downlink messages or retries can quickly push usage higher.

Is TCP/IP supported, or is NB-IoT limited to other protocols like UDP or NIDD?

TCP/IP is not supported for NTN NB-IoT. By avoiding the heavy overhead of TCP/IP, devices can send and receive data far more efficiently, using fewer bytes per message and significantly reducing power consumption.

Instead, NTN NB-IoT uses lightweight protocols such as UDP and NIDD (Non-IP Data Delivery), which are purpose-built for small, infrequent IoT messages. This means:

Lower airtime costs: No wasted data on headers or session management.
Lower power draw: The radio stays on for less time per message.
Simpler design: Devices can focus on sending just the essential payload.

Result: Your data goes further, your batteries last longer, and you stay well within the ideal 30-50 KB/month sweet spot for NTN NB-IoT.

Are message acknowledgements supported, and do they consume billable data?

In principle, acknowledgements are supported, but whether they’re available depends on the hardware and how it’s configured. Some devices, such as RockBLOCK RTU, can be programmed to generate acknowledgements, while others may not include this functionality out of the box.

Because an acknowledgement is just another downlink message, it does consume data and counts toward the device’s total monthly allowance (both uplink and downlink combined).

Frequent use of acknowledgements can quickly increase data consumption, so it’s best to:

Use them sparingly, such as for critical alerts where confirmation is essential.
Keep acknowledgement messages very small to stay within the <30 KB/month sweet spot.
Design systems so that most reporting is uplink-only, with acknowledgements reserved for exceptions or configuration updates.

Tip: If battery life and cost are key priorities, minimize acknowledgements and focus on efficient, uplink-driven workflows.

Coverage & Availability

What countries and regions are currently covered, and what are the rollout plans?

Currently, NTN NB-IoT service is available in the United States, Canada, New Zealand, Australia and Europe (partially). It is globally capable, but not yet globally available; effectively, there have to be enough end points / applications in a particular region for the service to be unlocked. We anticipate that coverage will expand rapidly over the next 1-3 years.

Will the service work at sea or in harsh environmental conditions (e.g., offshore, deserts, extreme temperatures)?

The service is certainly capable of this, but today it isn’t available for maritime applications (see above). Instead, explore message-based solutions like Viasat IoT Nano or Iridium Messaging Transport (IMT) for an economical alternative that has truly global coverage.

Technical

What are the main technical differences between NTN NB-IoT and cellular NB-IoT?

These are summarised in the below table, and discussed at length in the webinar (watch the recording on Youtube).

	NTN NB-IoT*	Cellular NB-IoT	Proprietary Satellite IoT**
Max. Practical Payload	1,200 bytes	1,400 - 1,600 bytes	16,000 bytes
Min. Practical Payload	10-30 bytes	30-50 bytes	10 bytes
Latency	Medium (10 - 60s); MVNO scheduling could increase this to 2 - 5 mins)	Low (1 - 10s)	Medium (c. 15-60s)
Directionality	Bidirectional	Bidirectional	Bidirectional
Coverage	United States, Canada, Brazil, Australia, New Zealand and select European markets	Where supported by regional MNOs, and there is terrestrial infrastructure	Global, exc. Polar regions
Cost-Optimized Monthly Data Volume	< 50 KB	< 5 MB	< 1 MB

*Based on Viasat NB-NTN | **Based on Viasat IoT Nano

How does NTN NB-IoT compare to proprietary satellite services like Iridium SBD?

NTN NB-IoT is designed for very small, infrequent data transmissions, such as tens of bytes per hour, making it a cost effective choice for applications like remote monitoring, tracking, and metering where usage stays below roughly 30-50 KB per month. It currently offers regional coverage rather than true global reach and has moderate latency, typically tens of seconds, which is acceptable for periodic updates but not for time-critical control.

Message-based proprietary services such as Iridium SBD share some similarities with NTN NB-IoT, as they also focus on small, discrete payloads and are well-suited for remote reporting. However, SBD offers truly global coverage, including oceans and polar regions, and has both lower latency and higher throughput, making it more robust for mobile or mission-critical assets.

In contrast, IP-based satellite services like Viasat IoT Pro or Iridium Certus 100 provide a continuous, always-on connection. This enables real time command and control, streaming data, and more complex integrations, something neither NTN NB-IoT nor SBD can deliver. These services are typically more expensive and consume more power, but they are essential for applications such as autonomous systems, live video feeds, or continuous telemetry.

In summary:

NTN NB-IoT is ideal for ultra-low power, ultra-low data needs.
Message-based services like SBD are better for mobile or global small data applications.
IP-based services are the only option for real-time control and high throughput use cases.

What frequencies are used, and how do they integrate with mobile networks?

Viasat’s NTN NB-IoT service (and indeed all of its satellite IoT services) operates in the L-band (around 1–2 GHz), a frequency range well suited for satellite IoT because it enables reliable coverage, compact, low power antennas, and resilience to weather related interference.

Because Viasat’s service follows the 3GPP NB-IoT standard, a single SIM and chipset can, in theory, support both terrestrial (TN) and satellite (NTN) networks, allowing devices to roam or fail over between them when agreements are in place.

Although TN and NTN NB-IoT share the same core standard, they operate under very different data and power constraints. TN NB-IoT supports larger, more frequent data transfers, often over IP-based protocols. NTN NB-IoT is optimized for tiny, infrequent messages and while it can utilize UDP/IP, Non-IP Data Delivery (NIDD) is desirable to keep airtime and costs low.

As a result, systems designed for terrestrial NB-IoT often need re-architecting to perform well over satellite. Key factors such as payload size, message frequency, and downlink strategy should be carefully planned to avoid unexpected performance or cost challenges.

How does network selection work when both terrestrial and satellite networks are available?

Most devices come with lowest-cost routing built in, so will use terrestrial when available, switching to satellite when cellular drops out, and allow control over when the device will attempt a satellite connection once cellular is not available.

Is NIDD part of the 3GPP standard and supported by the network?

Yes. Non-IP Data Delivery (NIDD) is fully part of the 3GPP NB-IoT standard and is supported by Viasat’s NTN NB-IoT network. We are strong advocates of NIDD because it’s the key to unlocking the true economics and efficiency of satellite IoT.

Unlike traditional IP-based messaging, which adds significant overhead to every transmission, NIDD allows devices to send only the essential data payload, with no IP headers or session management. This brings three major benefits:

Lower airtime costs – every byte transmitted is meaningful data.
Lower power consumption – shorter transmissions mean devices stay in deep sleep longer, extending battery life.
Simpler, leaner design – ideal for very small, infrequent messages typical of NTN NB-IoT use cases.

For ultra-low data applications like environmental sensors, asset tracking, or metering, NIDD is the preferred approach. While IP-based transport is still supported in the NB-IoT standard, it can quickly drive up airtime costs and power usage, especially over satellite links.

We’ve written a detailed explainer on why NIDD is so important for NTN NB-IoT; you can read it here: Unlocking NTN NB-IoT with NIDD.

Can we manage NTN NB-IoT devices and integrate using existing patterns in Cloudloop?

Yes. NTN NB-IoT devices can be fully managed and monitored within Cloudloop, alongside other satellite IoT devices, giving you a single, unified view of your entire deployment.

Through Cloudloop Data, information from NTN NB-IoT devices is automatically reformatted and standardized, so it can be delivered to a wide range of destinations, including cloud platforms, analytics tools, and third-party systems. This means you can continue using your existing integration patterns and workflows, with no need to rebuild or redesign your backend systems to handle NTN NB-IoT traffic.

Examples of integration destinations include:

AWS IoT Core
Azure IoT Hub
Google Cloud IoT
REST APIs and custom endpoints
Webhooks for custom workflows.

Because Cloudloop is network- and protocol-agnostic, it works seamlessly with both standards-based NB-IoT devices and proprietary satellite solutions, making it ideal for organizations running mixed technologies.

Use Cases & Comparisons

What applications are best suited to NTN NB-IoT?

NTN NB-IoT, whether delivered via UDP/IP or NIDD, is ideal for low data, low power applications where devices send small, infrequent messages and where a short delay (latency) is acceptable. Because the technology is optimized for tiny payloads and long battery life, it excels in deployments where maintaining coverage in remote or hard to reach locations is the priority.

The three strongest application areas are:

Monitoring – environmental sensors, infrastructure health checks, soil moisture, or weather stations.
Tracking – livestock, wildlife, or remote assets where location updates are needed periodically, not in real time.
Metering – water, gas, or energy usage reporting where daily or hourly readings are sufficient.

The service is designed to support large numbers of endpoints, each sending very small amounts of data. The sweet spot is around 30-50 KB per device per month, which equates to roughly one transmission per hour. This works well for applications like periodic sensor readings or basic status updates, but it’s not ideal for frequent updates, such as continuous tracking where you want to see location changes every few minutes.

How suitable is NTN NB-IoT for UAVs, HAPs, or other mobile applications?

NTN NB-IoT is not well suited for UAVs (Uncrewed Aerial Vehicles), HAPs (High-Altitude Platforms), or similar mobile applications. These platforms typically require an always-on, real time connection for tasks such as command and control, continuous telemetry, or video streaming.

NTN NB-IoT, by design, is optimized for tiny, infrequent data messages with latency measured in tens of seconds. This makes it perfect for periodic reporting, such as a water level sensor or asset tracker, but completely unsuited for dynamic, fast moving systems where constant situational awareness is required.

For UAVs, HAPs, and other highly mobile assets, you’ll need an IP-based satellite connection, which provides a continuous, reliable data link. Good options include:

Iridium Certus 100 – a truly global service for mobile platforms, ideal for command and control and small data streams.
Viasat IoT Pro – an IP-based L-band solution offering higher throughput for more complex or data-intensive applications.
Hardware like the RockREMOTE Mini OEM, designed specifically for integrating into UAVs or other custom mobile systems.

How does NTN NB-IoT compare to Starlink Direct to Cell?

Starlink Direct to Cell will use LTE Cat 1 and Cat 1 bis, making it well suited for higher throughput, mobile applications, particularly where devices have access to a reliable power source, such as vehicles or drones. This makes it an attractive option for use cases that require more frequent or larger data transfers than NTN NB-IoT can support.

However, Starlink D2C will not immediately offer global coverage. It relies on access to spectrum licences (often held by terrestrial Mobile Network Operators or by spectrum holders like EchoStar) to provide direct-to-cell service. For example, in a $17 billion deal announced in September 2025, SpaceX acquired EchoStar’s AWS-4 (2 GHz) and H-block spectrum in the United States, resolving part of the regulator’s concerns there. That said, such licences are country-specific, and spare spectrum is often limited, heavily regulated, or already allocated in densely populated countries, meaning availability will remain patchy and regionally concentrated.

Effectively the same considerations raised for whether NTN NB-IoT would work for your application should be raised for whether Starlink D2C (or equivalent services from AST SpaceMobile / Lynk) would work: how much data do you need; how often, and how urgently; what’s the power budget, and what’s the deployment region?

Companies like Ground Control can help you navigate these choices to identify the best network and protocol for your specific needs.

Could NTN NB-IoT replace or compete with services like Iridium or Starlink in the future?

In the foreseeable future, the answer is no. NTN NB-IoT and proprietary satellite systems are designed to solve different problems and will coexist for many years to come. Viasat continues to invest in its IoT Nano and IoT Pro services, and similarly, Iridium is planning to launch its own NTN NB-IoT service in the next two years and that will exist alongside their SBD, IMT and Certus 100 IoT services.

NTN NB-IoT opens up entirely new classes of applications that were previously cost prohibitive, thanks to its lower device and connectivity costs. However, this comes with trade-offs in data volumes, latency, coverage, and potential congestion. It is, at its core, a cellular standard adapted for satellite use, whereas proprietary systems were purpose-built for satellite, optimized to send data as efficiently as possible while conserving power and bandwidth.

Looking further ahead, in the mid-2030s, we expect to see the introduction of NTN NR (New Radio), a next-generation standard that supports much higher data rates and lower latency. While this could significantly change the landscape, it’s too early to predict what the commercial proposition will look like or whether it could compete directly with purpose-built satellite services.

Ultimately, the physics of satellite communication impose unavoidable constraints: it will always be more expensive and power hungry than terrestrial cellular networks, which limits its use to specific scenarios. The deciding factor over the next decade will not just be technology, but commercial dynamics – which service delivers the best mix of coverage, performance, and cost for a given application.

How well does it perform in environments with heavy metal or interference, such as steel plants?

No satellite IoT service – including NTN NB-IoT – can transmit reliably through heavy metal structures. For successful operation, the antenna must have a clear, unobstructed view of the sky. In environments such as steel plants or shipping yards, this usually means placing the antenna outside the structure or in a location with minimal obstructions.

For more guidance on what “clear view of the sky” really means and how to plan antenna placement, see our article: What Does a Clear View of the Sky Mean?

Antenna Requirements

Does NTN NB-IoT require direct line of sight, and how does it perform under partial obstruction (e.g., forest canopy)?

Viasat’s NTN NB-IoT service requires direct line of sight between the antenna and the satellite because it operates on GEO (geostationary) satellites. If the signal is obstructed, for example, by buildings, thick forest canopy, or even certain vehicle structures, performance will degrade significantly, and the connection may fail altogether. This makes careful antenna placement essential.

By comparison, services using LEO (Low Earth Orbit) satellites, such as Iridium’s forthcoming NB-IoT service, NTN Direct, are a little more forgiving. With multiple satellites constantly moving across the sky, a general “clear view of the sky” is sufficient, and temporary obstructions are less of a problem.

For practical guidance, see our article: What Does a Clear View of the Sky Mean? This explains how to evaluate your site and position antennas for reliable connectivity, whether you’re dealing with trees, rooftops, or industrial environments.

Are the satellites supporting NTN NB-IoT GEO, LEO, or a mix?

Viasat’s IoT satellites are currently all geostationary (GEO), meaning they orbit approximately 35,786 km above the Earth’s equator and remain fixed over a point on the planet. Once a link is established with a GEO satellite, it’s highly stable (if the endpoint is static) and reliable; however the greater distance means longer latency than satellites in Low Earth Orbit (LEO).

In 2027, we anticipate Iridium will launch its NTN NB-IoT service on their LEO satellites. This will create competition and allow devices to potentially connect to both GEO and LEO satellites for the same class of service.

For anyone interested in diving deeper into how satellite orbit height affects performance, our definitive guide is here: How Satellite Orbit Heights Impact Satellite Communication.

In Summary

NTN NB-IoT opens up exciting new possibilities for connecting devices in remote or hard-to-reach locations, enabling low cost, low power communication at a scale that was previously out of reach for many industries. However, like any technology, it has its strengths and limitations. It’s best suited to small, infrequent transmissions where latency is acceptable, and less suited to real time or high data volume applications.

If you’d like to explore NTN NB-IoT further, we’ve included some recommended resources below. And if you still have questions or want to discuss how NTN NB-IoT might fit into your specific project, please get in touch using the form at the bottom of this page, or email hello@groundcontrol.com; our team will be happy to help.

Any more questions?

If you didn’t find the answer you were looking for, or if you’d like to discuss how NTN NB-IoT could fit into your project, our team is here to help.

Simply fill out the form, and one of our experts will get back to you to talk through your requirements, explore possible solutions, and help you plan your next steps.

Whether you’re just starting to explore NTN NB-IoT or are ready to move ahead with a deployment, we’ll work with you to find the right approach for your application.

Unmanned aerial vehicles are no longer confined to the pilot’s line of sight. Today’s drone programs, from infrastructure inspection across deserts to search and rescue in the Arctic, depend on rock solid, global data links. Satellite connectivity has gone from “nice to have” to mission critical, but integrating it brings a fresh set of challenges: regulatory approvals for BVLOS, SWaP trade-offs inside a tiny airframe, keeping latency low for real time piloting, and building in fail-safe handovers when the sky gets crowded.

In this guide, we tackle the questions drone manufacturers ask most often. We’ll show you how to:

Click on the above links to jump straight to your top concern, or read straight through for an end-to-end blueprint. Let’s get you connected.

Q: What Makes BVLOS so Challenging, and How Can Satellite Connectivity Help?

A: Flying Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) introduces several core challenges which satellite connectivity can help mitigate using commercially available, aviation-tested technologies. The insights below draw on findings from Iridium’s excellent white paper, Monitored BVLOS Operations & Safe Separation, which we highly recommend reading in full.

1. Detect and Avoid (DAA)

Challenge: Drones must detect and steer clear of nearby aircraft, especially in non-segregated airspace.

Satellite role: By integrating Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS) avionics such as ADS-B In, and using satellite communications to deliver traffic data to the RPIC, operators can enhance situational awareness and support onboard or ground-based DAA strategies, even in regions with no ground infrastructure.

2. Reliable Command & Control (C2)

Challenge: Maintaining a robust, real-time command link is critical, but VHF is unavailable in remote areas and LTE coverage is patchy.

Satellite role: Iridium L-band communication links deliver consistent, uninterrupted C2 performance, even in remote and hostile environments where terrestrial networks fail. In test flights, satellite C2 links proved more reliable and continuous than LTE. Aircraft with dual independent L-band satcom systems also gain redundancy, ensuring control is maintained even if one link fails.

3. Communication with Air Traffic Control (ATC) and Other Aircraft

Challenge: Drones operating in controlled airspace still need to maintain communication with ATC and be aware of other traffic, even without VHF.

Satellite role: COTS satcom solutions can be used to maintain communication between RPICs and ATC where ground-based VHF isn’t an option. Integrating technologies such as ADS-B In and Out over satellite provides RPICs with the same traffic visibility expected of crewed IFR flights.

4. Regulatory and Certification Barriers

Challenge: Aircraft type certification processes were built for decades-long product cycles, not fast-evolving drone platforms. A 36 month certification timeline often means that core systems (e.g. batteries, avionics) are outdated by the time certification is complete.

Satellite role: While waiting for certification frameworks to catch up, drone operators can pursue BVLOS waivers for specific missions. Embedding a standardized Minimum Equipment List (MEL) of proven, COTS avionics and satcom hardware strengthens the case for safe, monitored BVLOS operations and supports a more scalable path toward regulatory approval.

Q: How Can I Integrate Satellite Connectivity Into My Drone Without Compromising on Size, Weight, or Power?

A: Thanks to ongoing improvements in satellite IoT hardware, it’s now possible to integrate satellite connectivity into a drone without breaking your SWaP budget, but there are trade-offs. Smaller, lighter, message-based modules like RockBLOCK 9603 and 9704 are ideal for sending telemetry or basic commands with minimal power draw. However, if your application demands real-time command and control, you’ll need a larger, IP-capable device like the RockREMOTE Mini OEM, which delivers more functionality, but at a higher cost in power and space.

1. Managing the SWaP Budget for Satellite Modules

Fortunately for UAV manufacturers, satellite IoT modules have been on a smaller, lighter, lower-power draw trajectory for several years, so it’s not usually difficult to find a module that will fit into your enclosure. Our most popular device is the RockBLOCK 9603, weighing just 36 g (1.27 oz) and measuring 45 x 45 x 15 mm. This incorporates a patch antenna, but because it usually sits within a metal enclosure, an external antenna is often deployed.

However, there are trade-offs between module size and capability. RockBLOCK 9603 utilizes Iridium’s Short Burst Data service (SBD), which is suitable for some drone applications, but not all.

It works well as a failover means of communication in the event that the primary means of communciation (usually radio) drops; to transmit the drone’s position, altitude and speed, and to issue basic commands (go to the nearest rally point; go home; terminate flight etc.).

If you simply need to send more data – for example, compressed images or multiple sensor readings – RockBLOCK 9704, which utilizes Iridium Messaging Transport (IMT), delivers much larger data packets, and is similarly small and light (35 g / 48 x 52 x 16 mm for the SMA – external antenna – option).

Both of these solutions are message-based, however, which makes them less suited to real-time command and control of your UAV. For this purpose you need an IP-based transmission, and that means both a larger device, which draws more power.

2. Trade-Offs Between Module Size, Transmit Power, and Battery Life

An IP-based connection enables near real-time communication, making it ideal for applications like command and control, or remote diagnostics. However, this comes at a cost: IP-based modules require more processing power, memory, and a more complex operating system, which increases both size and power consumption. They also transmit higher volumes of data, which typically requires more energy per transmission.

Our recommended hardware for an IP-based connection is RockREMOTE Mini OEM, as this utilizes both the Iridium Certus 100 airtime service, running at 22/88 Kbps, and Iridium Messaging Transport, giving you the option to save power and potentially costs by transmitting some data in a packet format, and reserving the IP connection for real-time applications. It’s also one of, if not *the*, smallest and lightest options for UAV IP communication.

Q: How do I Manage Latency When Designing Satellite Connectivity for Drones?

A: LEO satellites offer low latency – typically 0.5 – 1.5 seconds for IP-based services – making them ideal for real time drone control, while message-based protocols (around 10 seconds latency) are better suited to delay-tolerant data like location or telemetry. GEO satellites add more delay due to distance, but can still be effective for non-urgent communications.

Latency – the time it takes for your data to do the trip from your drone to your application – is chiefly governed by the satellite orbit height. Simply, the further away from Earth the orbit, the longer the latency. Satellite networks in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), including Iridium and Starlink, are between 160 and 2,000 km above Earth, and the typical round-trip latency for an IP-based service like Iridium Certus 100 is between 500 – 1,500 milliseconds (0.5 – 1.5 seconds). This makes LEO services ideal for time-sensitive operations like piloting or real time alerts.

It’s worth noting that LEO round-trip latency is longer for a message-based service – around 10 seconds – because the message is queued, then forwarded to a ground station, vs. an always-on transmission model. So, for drone applications, message-based protocols are better suited to delay-tolerant applications (location, altitude, speed; basic commands; failover comms), reserving IP-based connectivity for real time command and control, or live diagnostics.

Satellite Orbit Heights Diagram 2024

Satellites in Geostationary Orbit (GEO) are 35,786 km above Earth; because they’re so much further away, they can ‘see’ much more of the Earth’s surface, so fewer satellites are needed to provide wide coverage. The latency is longer – c. 2 seconds for an IP-based connection such as Viasat IoT Pro, and longer for a message-based solution such as Viasat IoT Nano – because the data has to travel further. However, if you can bake in some latency tolerance into your application, or simply reserve this means of communication for less time-sensitive telemetry, this offers an economical and often very stable means of communication.

Q: Is Satellite Connectivity Financially Viable for Drone Operations?

A: Satellite airtime can be tailored to match drone usage patterns and fleet scale, using flexible subscription models with clear pricing. For many drone operators, particularly those flying BVLOS or in low connectivity areas, satellite becomes cost effective with just 10 – 20 flight hours per month, especially when uptime is mission critical.

Flexible Subscription Models

Recognising that unmanned applications like drones are a key growth market, satellite network operators like Iridium offer increasingly diversified options for airtime. Ground Control, as a long-term Iridium partner, can offer UAV manufacturers and users monthly subscriptions, pay‑as‑you‑go, or annual commitments – all with transparent pricing and volume discounts for larger operations. Operators using existing Certus 100-compatible hardware can activate airtime instantly through Ground Control, simplifying deployment.

When Does Satcom Pay Off?

Although detailed cost breakdowns vary by mission profile, satellite connectivity often becomes cost effective at a relatively modest flight tempo. If your missions involve command/control, telemetry, or operations beyond cellular coverage, satellite ensures reliability that terrestrial networks can’t guarantee. With real time capabilities over Iridium Certus 100 and competitive airtime pricing, operational risk reduction often justifies the cost within 10 – 20 flight hours per month.

Connecting Drones Beyond Terrestrial Coverage

Satellite connectivity makes it possible to operate UAVs far beyond the reach of terrestrial networks, but integrating it requires thoughtful design. From managing size, weight and power to understanding latency, throughput and cost, this post outlines the key considerations for adding satcom to your drone system.

If you’re developing a satcom-enabled drone, our team can help you find the right hardware and airtime for your mission. Email hello@groundcontrol.com or complete the form, and we’ll be in touch within one working day.

Flying drones Beyond Visual Line of Sight (BVLOS) is the new frontier for commercial and industrial operations. Whether you’re surveying expansive agricultural lands, monitoring critical infrastructure, or conducting environmental research in remote regions, reliable connectivity is the linchpin for mission success. Recognizing this need, we’re excited to unveil Iridium Certus 100 aeronautical airtime plans tailored specifically for drone applications.

Why Satellite Connectivity Matters for BVLOS

Traditional RF and cellular networks may falter once a drone ventures beyond visual range, leading to dropped links, latency spikes, and potential safety hazards. To mitigate these risks, many aviation authorities now mandate a secondary communication channel to serve as a failsafe if the primary link fails. For example, the EASA requires redundant communication systems for BVLOS flights to ensure operational resilience, while the UK Civil Aviation Authority’s guidance similarly calls for dual-link architectures as part of any BVLOS operational authorization. In the United States, the FAA’s UAS BVLOS Aviation Rulemaking Committee report recommends demonstrating multiple active command-and-control links – or an automated failover scheme combining cellular, radio, and satellite – to secure BVLOS waivers.

Why Iridium Works Best

Satellite networks offer coverage with no dependency on terrestrial infrastructure, but that doesn’t mean all satellite networks are the same. In this context, low latency – the time it takes for you to send a command to the drone, and for it to receive it and respond – is critical, and therefore, satellite networks in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) are preferable. This is simply because they are closer to Earth than networks in Geostationary orbit, and therefore the round trip of data takes less time.

Iridium’s satellite network is in Low Earth Orbit, and further, it utilizes the L-Band radio frequency. L-Band signals are extremely reliable, and penetrate poor weather conditions with ease; ideal for mission-critical applications where you can’t afford to lose contact with your asset.

With Iridium Certus 100, operators enjoy 22/88 Kbps of bi-directional data, low latency, and complete pole-to-pole coverage, so your drone’s telemetry, sensor data, and command/control signals remain rock solid. It can be used as a primary or failover means of communication.

Our new airtime plans capitalize on our decades-long partnership with Iridium to provide flexible data bundles that scale from single drone deployments to entire fleets. Whether customers prefer monthly subscriptions, pay-as-you-go usage, or annual commitments, each plan features transparent rates, with volume discounts available for larger scale operations.

Customers who already own an Iridium Certus 100-compatible device can simply activate their chosen plan through Ground Control, eliminating the need for additional purchases or complex installation processes.

Recommended Hardware for IP Over Satellite

For those seeking an out-of-the-box solution, RockREMOTE Mini OEM provides direct board-level integration of the Iridium Certus 9770 module in a compact, 288 g form factor. Optimized for low power consumption, all non‑RF connections (Ethernet, serial, GPIO) are routed through a single 30‑way header, and installation is as simple as four screw mounts – no external gimbals or moving parts required.

Configuration and firmware updates are managed over Bluetooth LE via a companion app or API, and operators only need to attach the specified MMCX and U.FL antennas for Iridium and GNSS. Rated for operation from –40C to 70C and 95% humidity, RockREMOTE Mini OEM ensures mission-critical stability and performance across extreme environmental conditions.

RockREMOTE-Mini-OEM-with-end-cap-angle-2

Real-world use cases for these new airtime offerings span multiple industries. In agriculture, farmers can obtain real-time soil and crop health data from remote fields, optimizing inputs and maximizing yields. Renewable energy and utilities companies can conduct continuous inspections of pipelines, power lines, and wind turbines, preventing costly downtime and enhancing safety.

During emergency response missions, drones equipped with Iridium Certus 100 connectivity can relay critical situational data from disaster zones or search and rescue sites, accelerating decision-making when every second counts. Researchers performing environmental monitoring can gather long-range data on wildlife habitats, forestry conditions, and ocean patterns, undeterred by geographic isolation. And for jurisdictions that require communication redundancy, our plans serve as a reliable secondary link, providing an essential failsafe that keeps aircraft controllable even if the primary link is disrupted.

With affordable, reliable satellite connectivity and built-in redundancy now within reach, your BVLOS aspirations can become reality. Ground Control’s UAV-specific Iridium Certus 100 airtime plans can help extend your operational envelope, enhance safety, and unlock new business opportunities.

Would You Like to Know More?

If you’d like to get a quote for your UAV airtime, please complete the form, or email hello@groundcontrol.com, and we will respond within one working day.

It’s helpful if you can tell us more about your application, i.e. what sort of function do you need to perform (command and control in real-time, or the transmission of telemetry on demand, for example); any SWaP constraints; where you’ll be operating the drones etc.

According to IoT Analytics, the global market for satellite IoT connectivity is projected to grow at a CAGR of 26%, reaching $4.7 billion by 2030. Currently, the satellite IoT market is dominated by proprietary modules – meaning that if you want to use Iridium’s SBD service, you need an Iridium SBD module. These modules and accompanying protocols have been tailor-made for satellite communication, and can move large data payloads quickly and reliably, making them perfect for critical IoT applications such as alerts, command and control, and critical infrastructure.

The growth projected by IoT Analytics is anticipated to largely come from standards-based, rather than proprietary, IoT connectivity. This means using standards built for cellular to move data over satellite, so you can use the same chipset that you would use for cellular NB-IoT to access non-terrestrial NB-IoT (in this context, satellite-based connectivity is almost always referred to as NTN – non-terrestrial network). Analysts believe that the lower cost of modules, ability to switch suppliers, and extremely low power requirements will facilitate new, massive IoT applications.

That said, the cost of manufacturing proprietary modules – which have historically commanded a higher premium – is falling, as scale manufacturers like u-blox and Quectel have started to produce these at a much lower cost. Any massive IoT application which is not latency-tolerant, and/or needs to move larger volumes of data, will have options to explore in the proprietary module space, too.

In this blog post, however, we’re exploring NTN NB-IoT in detail, with the goal of helping systems integrators and network architects evaluate whether this emerging technology will suit their remote connectivity application.

What is NTN NB-IoT?

NB-IoT, or Narrowband Internet of Things, is a cellular technology standardized by 3GPP Release 13 in 2016. It was specifically designed for the Internet of Things. NB-IoT falls into the category of Low Power Wide Area Network (LPWAN) technologies. LPWAN technologies are tailored for devices with specific requirements, distinct from smartphones or mobile broadband connections. Key characteristics include:

Small Data Amounts

Devices are designed to send relatively small amounts of data, typically a few bytes or kilobytes, infrequently. This is suitable for simple sensor data or control commands.

Long Battery Life

Due to minimal data transmission and optimized radio usage, these devices are built to operate for extended periods on battery and/or solar power, often for several years.

Low Hardware Cost

LPWAN technologies typically have low cost hardware costs, which is essential for IoT deployments involving hundreds or thousands of devices spread over large geographical areas.

Wide Area Coverage

LPWAN technologies offer long range, low power, small packet connectivity over extensive areas, enabling huge numbers of devices to run for years on a single battery.

NB-IoT achieves these goals by using a subset of features from traditional LTE cellular technology, operating within a narrow slice of the radio spectrum (80 kilohertz bandwidth). This narrow bandwidth and simpler protocols are key to power efficiency and low cost, reducing the complexity and power consumption of the device’s modem. However, terrestrial NB-IoT devices can only send data in areas with reliable cellular coverage.

Non-Terrestrial Network Narrowband IoT (NTN NB-IoT) combines NB-IoT’s low power, low cost cellular technology with satellite communication, enabling devices to connect via satellites in addition to, or instead of, terrestrial towers.

NTN NB-IoT will, when fully mature as a technology, enable global IoT deployments, for projects involving large numbers of simple, low power, low data devices spread across remote areas and across borders. It extends the benefits of NB-IoT beyond its terrestrial limitations, delivering (depending on the satellite network) up to 100% global coverage.

What are the Benefits of NTN NB-IoT?

In addition to being extremely power efficient, the key benefits of cellular NB-IoT is that it operates in licensed spectrum controlled by Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) and standardized by 3GPP, which offers dedicated capacity, more flexibility in the cellular network for switching and roaming, and multi-vendor support for devices and network infrastructure.

NTN NB-IoT similarly operates within licensed spectrum, in this case, controlled by Satellite Network Operators (SNOs) like Viasat and Iridium. It is actively being standardized within 3GPP; initial support for NTN was introduced in Release 17, and Release 18 (launched mid-2024) is significantly advancing NTN integration into the 5G system. It uses a narrow spectrum of the L-Band, S-Band and Ka-Band frequencies, allowing IoT devices to communicate with LEO, MEO and GEO satellite constellations.

Mobile IoT devices equipped with NTN NB-IoT modules can move from terrestrial networks to satellite networks without needing to use a proprietary module. This means IoT devices can be built with a single chipset that delivers NB-IoT connectivity over both cellular and satellite networks, reducing hardware costs because of production economies of scale.

As noted earlier, proprietary modules are also set to benefit from these scale economics, as large chipset manufacturers like u-blox and Quectel are adding the production of these to their portfolio. A key distinction, however, is that a proprietary module will only allow you to connect with one satellite constellation, whereas an NTN NB-IoT module could connect to any satellite network that supports NTN NB-IoT, which could reduce airtime pricing thanks to competition. It will be some years before there is adequate coverage for this to be realized, however.

The promise of NTN NB-IoT lowering the cost of satellite connectivity has the potential to unlock new massive IoT applications in fields such as environmental monitoring, agriculture, and global asset tracking.

Challenges for NTN NB-IoT

Like its cellular counterpart, NTN NB-IoT is designed for large scale, battery-powered deployments. However, communicating with a satellite using a standards-based module, rather than a proprietary satellite modem, brings a new set of technical and economic challenges to overcome.

Higher Latency

While cellular NB-IoT can achieve sub-second latency, NTN NB-IoT introduces significantly higher delays due to the long round-trip to orbiting satellites. Latency can range from several seconds to tens of seconds depending on link quality, protocol, and retry mechanisms. Applications must be tolerant of delayed responses and asynchronous communication.

Increased Battery Usage

Satellite transmissions require higher power output from the radio module to maintain a stable link, particularly in marginal conditions or at low elevation angles. Combined with longer active sessions (due to higher latency), this can drain batteries faster than in terrestrial NB-IoT deployments. Efficient power management and optimized duty cycling become critical.

Antenna Positioning

Terrestrial NB-IoT signals can penetrate walls and underground spaces, allowing flexible antenna placement. NTN NB-IoT requires a clear, unobstructed view of the sky to connect to a satellite, and in many cases, line of sight to a specific satellite at a fixed angle. This can complicate deployments, especially in mountainous or forested environments.

Coverage

NTN NB-IoT coverage is currently limited to specific regions: spot beams lit over North America, Europe, parts of South America, and Australasia. Coverage is expanding, but it’s far from global. Cellular NB-IoT, by contrast, offers much broader regional coverage wherever networks have been deployed and roaming agreements are in place.

Costs

Although standards-based NTN NB-IoT is cheaper than some proprietary satellite services, it’s many times more expensive than cellular NB-IoT. It is more expensive than proprietary options if you exceed monthly data volumes ~30 kB. Cost models are evolving, but pricing will reflect the more limited spectrum and capacity available in space.

Network Congestion

Satellite networks have far less capacity than terrestrial ones, and as NTN NB-IoT adoption grows, so will contention. Congestion may lead to failed transmissions, backoff delays, or restricted access during peak times, especially in areas with high device density or where consumer direct-to-device (D2D) services compete for bandwidth.

Lower Data Rates

NTN NB-IoT operates at significantly lower physical data rates than terrestrial NB-IoT - typically 1-2 Kbps vs. tens or hundreds of Kbps - and enforces small message sizes (e.g., 256 bytes max). This makes it well-suited for small, infrequent payloads, but unsuitable for bandwidth-heavy or real-time applications.

Data Optimization for NTN NB-IoT

For remote NTN NB-IoT applications, sending occasional small data packets becomes essential to reduce signaling duration and battery energy usage, as well as to minimize costly per-byte satellite usage.

When it comes to selecting how data is transferred, there are two options provided by the key players in the industry: IP and Message-based protocols. And to meet the data constraints of remote NTN NB-IoT applications, these protocols become a choice between UDP/IP and NIDD (Non-IP Data Delivery).

Here’s an example to highlight the differences between UDP/IP and NIDD data packet sizes.

A simple water level sensor is sending a status reading and the raw data is 18 bytes long. On top of that, the application running on the device is using CoAP (Constrained Application Protocol), which adds a 4-byte header. This creates a payload of 22 bytes of application data.

To send this message using a traditional UDP/IP stack, the IP and UDP headers add a further 28 bytes, resulting in a total packet size of 50 bytes. By contrast, using NIDD the message is transmitted without any IP or UDP headers, so the total packet size remains just 22 bytes. This efficiency makes NIDD particularly well suited to low-power, low-data IoT devices operating over NTN networks, where every byte of airtime and every milliwatt of battery power matters.

UDP/IP vs NIDD for NTN NB-IoT Applications

So, the case for using NIDD for NTN NB-IoT is that it reduces the size of data packets to be sent to the satellite, and therefore reduces satellite byte costs, while drawing less power. However, the key benefit of UDP/IP is that the same IP address can be used when moving between cellular and satellite, which is useful for applications which cover devices moving in and out of cellular range, such as maritime vessels or pipeline monitoring.

Comparing UDP/IP and NIDD Benefits

Depending on their agreement with the SNO, some NTN NB-IoT service providers will be offering UDP/IP and/or NIDD solutions, and there are benefits and drawbacks to both. Here is a comparison table to highlight the key differences between each method of data transfer.

	UDP/IP over NTN NB-IoT	NIDD (Non-IP) over NTN NB-IoT
Protocol Overhead	IPv4+UDP adds 28 bytes header per packet. Some NTN offerings bill with a 50-byte minimum that includes this IP/UDP header.	No IP/UDP header; payload is carried on signaling (control-plane), avoiding the 28-byte IP/UDP overhead of UDP.
Power Consumption	Higher than NIDD for tiny, intermittent messages because you transmit extra header bytes and maintain an IP data session.	Lower for small, sporadic messages by eliminating IP overhead and using signaling paths designed for low power.
Integration	Easier for standard IP apps; minor firmware/backend changes may be needed.	Requires SCEF/I-API support and backend changes to map messages to your application.
Security	Runs over the Internet path; secure with DTLS/TLS and/or VPN. NAT/VPN commonly recommended for inbound traffic.	Data doesn’t traverse the public Internet; operator exposure functions provide an extra security boundary.
Roaming	Single IP address when moving terrestrial ↔ satellite.	Satellite‑only: no IP address for cellular roam; each uplink uses the NTN pathway.
Best For...	Applications that move in/out of cellular coverage (e.g., maritime, logistics).	Ultra‑low data, stationary sensors where minimizing airtime and power is paramount.

Cost & Minimum Payload Considerations

The economics of NTN NB‑IoT hinge heavily on each provider’s minimum supported packet size. Today, Skylo enforces a 50 B floor (including headers) on every UDP/IP message, effectively eliminating NIDD’s payload‑size savings until true NIDD support arrives. Likewise, Sateliot offers standard 3GPP Rel‑17 NB‑IoT over satellite (UDP/IP only) and hasn’t published any reduced‑overhead or NIDD option, so ultra‑small packet users are forced into that same ~50 B envelope.

Until more satellite operators clarify their packet‑size limits or introduce truly NIDD‑capable services, many “tiny telemetry” applications will find themselves priced out of the savings NIDD could otherwise deliver.

The first full NIDD offerings won’t arrive until H1 2026, when Viasat IoT Direct launches its satellite‑only NB‑IoT SIM, complete with both UDP/IP and NIDD modes. Shortly after, Iridium NTN Direct – built on 3GPP Release 19 NTN enhancements – will also bring standardized NIDD support (devices expected in 2026).

In the meantime, proprietary satellite‑IoT networks such as Iridium SBD and Viasat IoT Nano bill in 10 B increments, making them the only current options for truly tiny, cost‑efficient uplinks – albeit at the price of custom hardware and vendor lock-in.

NTN NB‑IoT Service Timeline

Early 2024 – Summer 2025

Skylo rolls out its Release 17-based service (UDP/IP only) via partner MNOs across the United States, Canada, Brazil, Australia, New Zealand and select European markets
Sateliot operates a demo LEO fleet for Rel 17 NB‑IoT trials; today’s service is UDP/IP only, with no published NIDD option.

H2 2025 (Pilot & Dev Kits)

Viasat IoT Direct appears in partner POCs and developer previews (e.g., Ground Control’s Cloudloop integration), with two way NB‑IoT over L‑band. UDP/IP today, NIDD to follow.

H1 2026 (Projected Commercial Launch)

Viasat IoT Direct full release: satellite‑only NB‑IoT SIM supporting both UDP/IP and NIDD payloads
Iridium NTN Direct enters commercial service built on 3GPP Release 19 NTN enhancements (including standardized NIDD support).

Will NTN NB‑IoT Open New Markets for Satellite IoT?

NTN NB‑IoT holds clear potential to bring truly global, low‑power IoT to industries unable to leverage terrestrial networks; think widespread environmental sensing, remote infrastructure monitoring and asset tracking in the world’s most isolated regions. However, two pivotal commercial variables will determine how far it can go:

Cost per Byte & Minimum Packet Size: Until services offer sub‑30 B NIDD payloads at competitive rates (versus today’s 50 B UDP/IP floors or proprietary 10 B options), many micropacket use cases will remain marginal.
Network Capacity & Congestion Management: Supporting massive fleets of devices over narrow satellite channels requires robust scheduling, interference mitigation and priority handling – features still under development in Rel 17/18 NTN specs and vendor implementations.

Importantly, NTN NB‑IoT does not replace today’s proven proprietary services; it adds to the IoT toolbox. Solutions like Iridium SBD/IMT and Viasat IoT Nano will continue to serve critical, higher throughput or low latency applications, where SLAs, two‑way command/control and strong QoS are non‑negotiable. And, as discussed, the advent of scale manufacturers taking over the production of proprietary modules is set to bring down the cost of these services. NTN NB‑IoT, by contrast, unlocks a new class of latency-tolerant, very small data deployments of homogenous hardware across areas with a mix of cellular and satellite coverage.

Once Viasat IoT Direct and Iridium NTN Direct deliver standardized NIDD in 2026, expect a step‑change: low power, low cost satellite IoT scaling from niche pilots into planet‑wide solutions, while incumbent proprietary networks remain the go‑to for mission‑critical workloads.

Talk to Us About NTN NB-IoT

We’re experts in satellite IoT and asset tracking, and are actively working on new NTN NB-IoT enabled hardware and service integrations with our IoT platform, Cloudloop.

If you have questions about how NTN NB-IoT could enable your IoT projects, please email hello@groundcontrol.com or complete the form to tell us about your requirements, and we’ll reply within one working day.

The Threat of Jamming and Spoofing

When GPS fails in Aviation, Maritime and Defense

Aviation

Maritime

Defense

The Hybrid Navigation Future

1. Multi-constellation GNSS

2. Inertial navigation systems (INS) and sensor fusion

3. eLORAN (terrestrial low-frequency radio)

4. Quantum and advanced sensing

5. Assured Positioning, Navigation and Timing (A-PNT)

Iridium PNT:

A Layered Approach for Future GPS Resiliency

Read More About APNT For Resilience Beyond GPS

A-PNT: Tracking and Navigation in GPS-Denied Environments

How RockSTAR APNT Ensures Resilient Tracking For Military In GPS-Denied Environments

Tackling Maritime GPS Spoofing and Jamming Threats with RockBLOCK APNT

RockBLOCK APNT

RockSTAR APNT

Connecting Assets and Operations Beyond GPS

About CLS Group

Get in touch

45%

See security & resilience in IoT as the top priority

45%

Expect next-gen proprietary services to shape operations

56%

Of Asian respondents say AI will influence their industry

Key Insights from the Report

1. Security and Resilience

2. Next Generation Proprietary Services

3. New Mega Constellations

4. Standards-Based Satellite IoT (D2D)

5. AI and the Value of IoT Data

Can we help?

Why Remote Pipelines Need Satellite IoT

The Cost of Connectivity Gaps in Pipeline Monitoring

How Satellite IoT Bridges The Connectivity Gap

1. Detecting Anomalies Before They Escalate

2. Predictive Maintenance with Data Intelligence

3. Monitoring and Control from Afar

Choosing the Right Satellite IoT Solution

For Low Data Volumes and Periodic Updates: NTN NB-IoT

For Higher Data Volumes or More Frequent Reporting: Iridium Messaging Transport (IMT)

For Real Time Monitoring and Remote Control: IP-Based Solutions

Can we help?

The Comms Reality Check

1. Vulnerability to inference and jamming

2. Coverage gaps in rural and offshore areas

3. Network failures during disasters

4. Technical limitations

Choosing the Right Connectivity

LEO vs GEO: Understanding the Differences

Hybrid Strategies: Best of Both Worlds

Matching Satellite Services to Missions

Simple Commands (Light Missions)

Full BVLOS Operations

Recommended Hardware

RockBLOCK 9704

RockBLOCK 9603

RockREMOTE Mini OEM

Key Takeaways

Related Blog Posts

Affordable BVLOS Drone Connectivity: Introducing Iridium Certus 100 Airtime Plans for Drone Operators

Attitudes Towards Commercial & Military Drone Applications 2024

Power, Payload, Performance: What Drone Manufacturers Ask Us About Satellite Connectivity

ETH Zurich’s Autonomous UAVs Utilizing the RockBLOCK

The Vital Role of LEO Satellites in Safe and Secure UAV Drone Operations

Drones in Modern Warfare: Enhancing UAV Capabilities with Satellite Connectivity

Take Your BVLOS Operations Further

Pricing and Licensing

What is the expected cost of hardware (e.g., modem, antenna)?

What will ongoing connectivity cost, for example at 50 KB per month or one transmission per hour?

How does NTN NB-IoT communication cost compare to terrestrial NB-IoT and proprietary satellite solutions?

Does the device include a subscription, and are any licenses required to use the service?

Power Consumption

What are the expected power requirements for receiving and sending messages?

Will latency in satellite NB-IoT significantly impact battery performance?

Data & Protocols

What counts as “small data volumes,” and how is data usage calculated (uplink vs downlink)?