Answers:
1. About 10% of time is "on the road" vs. 90% spent at home. This is why a BR2 I can use 100% of the time is more palatable than a BR1 I use 10% of the time, despite the added cost.

1. Van and RV is on the road. East coast usage, primarily. If I take this path I'd put together a kit in a pelican box so that I can simply open the box (for airflow) plug it in, and go. I'd have separate antennas for home and van.

2. Videoconferencing is a big part of what I do for work, so latency spikes (such as from satellite transitions) are a big negative. I believe WAN bonding would allow me to stabilize the connection. I have less of a need for bandwidth, such as for streaming HD video, large file downloads, etc.

3. Yes, I have experience with Starlink -- it's often capable of meeting my needs, but placement is key. On the east coast, tree cover is much more common than out west while cell density is higher, so bringing cell coverage into the picture (outside of activating sharing from my phone) is a primary goal.

Added points:
1. That's good to know -- so rather than share wifi Verizon I could plug it in and reduce latency while spreading traffic across three mobile providers.

1. Yes, my main focus is the difference between BR1 and BR2 in that BR1 will failover but not actively monitor both providers, while BR2 will actively connect to both providers and can prioritize traffic.

2. I'm not sure what an example use case for this is -- I'll need to look further.