Aircraft Fuel Tank Architecture Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Half the field sits with five filers. The top 5 assignees account for 230 of 460 records in scope (50.0%), and the top 10 hold 65.7% — a narrow group of aerospace primes and systems suppliers sets the terms for anyone entering fresh.
- Filing peaked in 2017 and has since cooled. Annual filings ran from 55 in 2017 to a 2021-2024 change of 8 to 7 records, a -13% shift over that span — recent years are still filling in as publications lag filing by roughly 18 months.
- Sensing and measurement classes rival airframe classes. G01F flow/level measurement (10.2%) and G01N material testing (9.6%) both post double-digit shares alongside B64C aeroplane structure (16.1%), pointing to sensing and diagnostics as an active claim zone, not just tank geometry.
Filing growth compares 2021 (8 records) with 2024 (7) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 460 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
Aircraft fuel tank architecture spans the structural design of integral and wing fuel tanks, the sealants and access panels that keep them serviceable, and the ancillary systems — venting, inerting, level sensing, and slosh control — that let a tank operate safely across a flight envelope. This landscape pulls 460 published records from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 cut-off, filtered on tank structure terms (integral fuel tank, wing fuel tank, baffle rib, collector cell) paired with functional terms (fuel tank sealant, vent line, fuel sloshing, tank access panel).
The scope favours documents where structural and functional claims co-occur, so it under-represents pure sealant chemistry or pure avionics filings that never reference tank architecture directly. Readers using this as a freedom-to-operate starting point should treat the 460-record set as the structural-and-systems core of the field, not its full periphery.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 460-record set: the annual filing curve, and the IPC subclasses those filings carry. Because a single record can sit in several subclasses, the technology shares add up to more than 100% of the record total.
Filings rose sharply then eased back from a 2017 peak
Annual filings reached 55 in 2017, the peak year in the series, before settling into a lower band. The tracked 2021-to-2024 change (8 to 7 records, -13%) is the only growth figure this page asserts; 2025 and 2026 remain partial because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months, so treat the tail of the curve as incomplete rather than declining.
Airframe equipment dominates, but measurement classes are substantial
B64D aircraft equipment covers 54.6% of records and B64C aeroplane/helicopter structure covers 16.1%, confirming that most filings anchor to tank hardware itself. G01F flow/level measurement (10.2%), G01N material analysis (9.6%), B01D separation processes (6.7%), A62C fire-fighting (5.9%), B64F ground installations (5.9%) and B05D coating processes (5.7%) show meaningful secondary activity in sensing, inerting media, and maintenance-adjacent processes.
Shares are the percentage of the 460 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Aircraft Fuel Tank Architecture with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about aircraft fuel tank architecture and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records and a representative filing
US8936218B2 — Aircraft fuel tank vent
An aircraft having a dihedral wing configuration with a wing fuel tank and a vent system for ventilating the fuel tank, the vent system including a combined vent-surge tank disposed inboard of at least part of the wing fuel tank, a vent fluidically connecting the vent-surge tank to ambient, and a vent line fluidically connecting the upper part of the fuel tank to the combined vent-surge tank, wherein the vent line has its lowest point at the combined vent-surge tank.Filed by Airbus Operations Limited, dated 2015-01-20 — an early entry in this scope illustrating how vent-line geometry and surge-tank placement get claimed as structural features rather than as a control system.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US9656762B2 | System for temperature and actuation control and method of controlling fluid temperatures in an aircraft | 177 |
| 2 | US4913380A | Fuel system for Canard aircraft | 111 |
| 3 | US7385692B1 | Method and system for fiber optic determination of gas concentrations in liquid receptacles | 110 |
| 4 | US5534708A | Optical fuel/air/water sensor and detector circuit | 103 |
| 5 | US6634598B2 | On-board fuel inerting system | 94 |
| 6 | US20050286054A1 | Oxygen sensor for aircraft fuel inerting systems | 84 |
| 7 | US3901025A | Aircraft engine fuel system | 80 |
| 8 | US20030218098A1 | Airplane fuel supply system and airplane wing pipeline assembly method | 65 |
| 9 | US6736354B2 | Airplane fuel supply system and airplane wing pipeline assembly method | 64 |
| 10 | US5880480A | Optical liquid level sensor including built-in test circuitry | 60 |
Citation counts reflect visibility within this searched corpus and skew toward older filings; they signal influence on later work, not present-day importance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →What the numbers mean for freedom to operate
Reading concentration, trend and citation data together points to where claim space is dense and where it is thin.
Half the field sits with five filers
With 230 of 460 records concentrated among five assignees, new entrants should expect to design around an established claim base on core tank structure and sealing before looking at adjacent systems. The leader alone accounts for 101 records.
A 2017 peak followed by a lower, still-active plateau
Filing volume has not returned to its 2017 peak, but the 2021-2024 window shows only a modest -13% change (8 to 7 records) — closer to a plateau than a retreat, especially once the 18-month publication lag is taken into account for 2025-2026.
Sensing and temperature control draw outsized citation weight
The most-cited record in this corpus concerns aircraft fluid temperature control and actuation, not tank geometry, and several other highly-cited records concern optical or fiber-optic sensing of fuel and gas. Influence in this field has run through measurement and control, not just structure.
Filing activity is US-anchored with a strong European tier
The United States leads receiving offices with 176 records, followed by the EPO at 86 and the UK at 42; Germany, Canada and Austrian filings each sit in the 27-33 range, indicating a genuinely transatlantic filing pattern rather than a single-jurisdiction concentration.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to aircraft fuel tank architecture, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the claims and where momentum has gone quiet
The ranked list covers 92 companies across the full 460-record set — not a top-50 or top-100 cut. Recent-year filing activity has dropped to zero across the leading assignees tracked here, consistent with the broader 2025-2026 publication lag rather than a sudden stop in R&D.
One aerospace prime holds the largest single share
The leading assignee's 101 records is more than double the fifth-place total of 19, showing a steep drop-off rather than a gentle taper at the very top of the ranking.
A long tail begins just past the top ten
By tenth place, filing counts have fallen to 12 records, and the ranking runs to 92 companies total — meaning most of the field is made up of assignees with single-digit or single-filing presence.
Named-inventor pairings cluster around one prime
The strongest co-assignee links in this dataset all connect the leading assignee with named individual inventors, each appearing twice — a pattern typical of large in-house engineering teams rather than cross-company joint filings.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| The Boeing Company | 0 | — |
| Airbus Operations Limited | 0 | — |
| Parker Hannifin Corporation | 0 | — |
| Embraer S.A. | 0 | — |
| Hamilton Sundstrand Corporation | 0 | — |
| BAE Systems plc | 0 | — |
| PATENT WELL LLC | 0 | — |
| General Electric Company | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, licensing, or R&D scoping.
Run a freedom-to-operate check on vent and surge-tank geometry
With the leading assignee holding 101 records and vent-line/surge-tank structure a recurring claim theme, a targeted clearance search on that specific geometry is worth doing before committing a new design.
Explore this in EurekaTrack sensing and measurement filings separately from structure
G01F and G01N classes carry double-digit shares of the corpus independent of B64D and B64C, so sensing and diagnostics claims should be searched and monitored as their own track, not folded into structural clearance work.
Build a sensing-focused searchWatch for the 2025-2026 publication catch-up
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the apparent plateau after 2017 should be re-checked once 2025 and 2026 filings finish publishing, rather than treated as a settled trend today.
Set an alert for new publicationsFrequently asked questions
Filing activity is concentrated: the top 5 assignees hold 230 of 460 records in scope, or 50.0% of the field, and the top 10 hold 65.7%. The single leading assignee accounts for 101 records, more than double the fifth-place total of 19. Beyond the top ten the ranking extends to 92 companies total, with counts falling quickly into single digits — a classic concentrated-top, long-tail structure typical of a mature aerospace subsystem.
Filings peaked in 2017 at 55 records and have settled to a lower level since, with the tracked 2021-to-2024 window showing a modest -13% change (8 to 7 records) rather than a sharp drop. Because publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures in any dataset are still incomplete and should not be read as a decline. The more accurate read is a post-peak plateau, not a retreating field.
B64D, the aircraft-equipment subclass, appears in 54.6% of the 460 records, and B64C aeroplane and helicopter structure appears in 16.1% — together confirming that most filings are anchored to physical tank and airframe hardware. Sensing and materials classes are also substantial: G01F flow and level measurement covers 10.2% of records and G01N material analysis covers 9.6%, with fire-fighting, coating and ground-installation classes each in the 5.7-6.7% range. A record can carry more than one class, so these figures overlap rather than sum to 100%.
US8936218B2, filed by Airbus Operations Limited and dated 2015-01-20, claims a dihedral-wing aircraft fuel tank vent system built around a combined vent-surge tank positioned inboard of the wing fuel tank, with a vent line whose lowest point sits at that surge tank. It is a structural claim on vent-line geometry and surge-tank placement, not a claim on venting in general, so designs that route the vent line differently or avoid a combined vent-surge tank arrangement sit outside its literal scope. Anyone designing a new wing vent system should check this claim's specific geometry limitations rather than assume all vent-surge tank designs are blocked.
The clearest gaps sit adjacent to the dominant structural classes rather than inside them: fiber-optic and other non-traditional fuel gauging methods, collector cell drainage geometry, vent-surge tank sizing rules, damping-profile design for slosh-control baffles, and distribution control for inerting media all show thinner, less structurally-specific coverage relative to core tank and vent claims. These are areas where a first mover could stake out a defensible position without going head-to-head against the top assignees' core structural filings.
Research Aircraft Fuel Tank Architecture in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole aircraft fuel tank architecture corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.