At what velocity does relativistic gravity correction actually become comparable to atmospheric drag effects?

Your question asks for a practical threshold—where relativistic gravity becomes as significant as atmospheric drag—but the preprints don't directly compare those two effects.

Here's what the archive does tell us about when relativistic corrections matter:

For interstellar spacecraft, relativistic gravity effects become important at surprisingly modest velocities. A mission to Proxima Centauri b traveling at relativistic speeds requires post-Minkowskian gravitational corrections (which account for spacetime curvature to first order) if the navigation accuracy target is better than ~690,000 km [AG-2025.10-349]. This sets a threshold, but doesn't explicitly link it to atmospheric drag.

For Earth-orbit spacecraft, relativistic effects are measurably small. Quantum communication satellites show that relativistic time-dilation and frequency shifts matter for performance, but the analysis notes that relativistic corrections to Keplerian orbits themselves are negligible compared to gravitational effects on the timescale studied [AG-2025.09-416]. Implicitly, this suggests relativistic gravity becomes comparable to *other* perturbations only well above typical satellite speeds.

The vis-viva equation (which relates orbital speed to energy) can be corrected for general relativistic effects [AG-2024.04-291], but again without quantifying the crossover point versus drag.

The practical answer: for objects in the lower atmosphere (where drag is strong), relativistic gravity corrections are utterly negligible. For high-speed interstellar craft, relativity dominates. The archive doesn't pin down where drag and relativistic gravity become *equal* contributors to trajectory error.