## 2 Related Works
### Requirements  
As a starting point, we established performance requirements based on standardized industrial UAV use cases. Here, the 3 GPP TR 22.829 standard [22] proved helpful. It centers on 3 GPP's support for a diverse range of applications and scenarios utilizing low-altitude UAVs in various commercial and government sectors. It addresses service requirements and KPIs associated with command and control (C2), payload functions (e.g., camera), and the operation of on-board radio access nodes. Table 1 presents several specific use cases from the standard. All of them demonstrate the need for higher uplink traffic alongside downlink control traffic with appropriately low throughput. Particularly relevant to the context of our research was the S2 use case, which describes laser mapping, as the LiDAR sensor was our central interest. The standard itself is frequently cited in the context of UAV applications across different scenarios. For example, ref. [23] explored how reconfigurable smart surfaces (RSS) can be integrated into aerial platforms to enhance 5G and beyond (B5G) connectivity by intelligently reflecting signals. This study outlined RSS technology, proposed a control architecture, discussed potential use cases, and identified research challenges in this emerging field. In [24], the authors examined the use of UAV-based communication at millimeter-wave frequencies for on-demand radio access in B5G systems, focusing on dynamic UAV positioning to match fluctuating user traffic and realistic backhaul constraints. The study reviewed recent 3 GPP activities, compared static and mobile UAV communication options, and demonstrated that leveraging UAV mobility can enhance overall system performance despite backhaul limitations. Another example is presented in [25], where the authors studied how terahertz (THz) bands can empower UAVs with ultra-high throughput, low latency, and precise sensing to meet the stringent requirements of the 6G ecosystem. It reviewed potential use cases, \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{3}{*}{**ID**} & \multirow{3}{*}{**Services**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Uplink**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Service**} & \multirow{3}{*}{} & \multirow{3}{*}{} & \multirow{3}{*}{} \\  & & **Data Rate** & & & & & \\  & & **(UAV to** & & & & \\  & & **Net)** & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{S1} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{8K video} & \multirow{3}{*}{100 Mbps} & \multirow{3}{*}{600 Kbps} & \multirow{3}{*}{200 ms} & \multirow{3}{*}{20 ms} & \multirow{3}{*}{\textless{}100 m} \\  & & live & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & broadcast & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{S2} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Laser mapping/HD} & \multirow{3}{*}{120 Mbps} & \multirow{3}{*}{300 Kbps} & \multirow{3}{*}{200 ms} & \multirow{3}{*}{20 ms} & \multirow{3}{*}{30–300 m} \\  & & & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{patrol} & & & & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{S3} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Remote} & \multirow{3}{*}{300 Kbps} & \multirow{3}{*}{100 ms} & \multirow{3}{*}{20 ms} & \multirow{3}{*}{\textless{}300 m} \\  & & UAV & & & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & controller & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & through & & & & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & HD video & & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Data and control latencies refer to end-to-end delays in the uplink (UAV to network) and downlink (network to UAV), respectively. The UAV typically flies at an average speed of 60 km/h, with peak speeds reaching up to 160 km/h.  
\end{table} 
Table 1: UAV use case (based on 3 GPP TR 22.829 [22]). design challenges, trade-offs, and regulatory aspects and provided numerical insights through a UAV-to-UAV communication case study. [PERSON] et al., in [26], proposed using unmanned aerial vehicles (WI UAVs) equipped with 6G NR in the unlicensed band (NR-U) to create a flexible, flying wireless infrastructure that can serve as a base station, relay, or data collector.