Open Rotor Engine Lightweight Design Patent Landscape 2026
- Two families total. the entire searched corpus for this claim scope is two patent families, filed exclusively through the United States receiving office.
- Filing is flat, not rising. the 2022 midpoint sits at zero and the trend only picks up at the very end of the window, with the peak of two records arriving in 2025.
- One assignee, and it just dropped off. General Electric Company (GE) (GE) shows 0 filings in the latest year, a -100% year-on-year change from its prior activity.
A narrow, sparsely filed claim space
The intersection of open rotor and unducted fan architectures with explicit lightweight-design, weight-reduction or composite-structure language, filtered to the relevant IPC classes, returns only two published records across the entire 2015–2026 window. That is not a data error; it reflects how few applicants draft claims that name both the propulsor configuration and the weight-saving mechanism in the same document. Most composite or lightweight structure work for these engines is likely filed under broader materials or general aircraft-structure classes rather than under this specific combination.
Because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025–2026 figures in this dataset are the least complete and should be read as a floor, not a ceiling, on actual filing activity.
Filing trend and technology split
With only two records in scope, every chart here should be read as a directional signal rather than a statistically robust trend line.
Filing trend: flat until a late uptick
Filings sit at zero from 2017 through the 2022 midpoint, then reach their peak of two records in 2025. There is no sustained growth curve to extrapolate from — the dataset shows an absence of activity followed by a single active year.
IPC composition: aircraft equipment leads
B64D (aircraft equipment) accounts for both records, with B64C (aeroplanes and helicopters) appearing once alongside it. The classification pattern points to filings framed around installed equipment and airframe integration rather than the core turbine or rotor mechanics under F01D.
Shares are the percentage of the 2 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Open Rotor Engine Lightweight Design with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about open rotor engine lightweight design and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaWhat the most-cited record actually covers
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20260084826A1 | Aircraft with an unducted fan propulsor | 1 |
Citation counts here are low in absolute terms and reflect a small, young corpus — treat as a starting point for freedom-to-operate review, not a definitive blocking map.
Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (1 of 1 rows); 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 →Reading a two-family dataset correctly
Small corpora reward caution. The following observations describe what the evidence supports and, just as importantly, what it does not.
The claim combination is rare, not the technology
Open rotor and unducted fan work exists well beyond these two families; what is rare is drafting that names both the propulsor type and a lightweight-design mechanism together in the same claim set. Broader composite-structure or general nacelle filings likely sit outside this search string.
Filing activity is entirely US-routed
Both records entered through the United States receiving office. That concentration may reflect where open rotor demonstrator programmes are currently based, or simply the small sample size — it should not be read as a global filing pattern.
The one named assignee has gone quiet
General Electric Company (GE) (GE) shows zero filings in the latest year against prior activity, a full year-on-year drop. Combined with publication lag, this could mean a real pause or simply that newer filings have not yet published.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to open rotor engine lightweight design, with the prior art for and against each one.
A field with one visible name and a long unlit tail
The assignee ranking in this dataset is built from two families, and only one applicant, General Electric Company (GE) (GE), is identifiable by name in the momentum data. That leaves most of the claim space effectively unclaimed by any single dominant filer.
General Electric Company (GE) (GE)
The one assignee visible in the recent-year momentum data shows no filings in the latest year, down from prior activity — a -100% year-on-year change. With only two families in the whole corpus, this single data point carries more weight than it would in a larger dataset.
No second filer surfaces
The ranking does not surface a second named competitor at this claim scope, which is consistent with a niche, narrowly defined search string rather than an empty field. Related lightweight-structure work from other engine makers likely exists under adjacent classifications.
Single receiving office
Every record in scope entered via the United States. Applicants targeting other jurisdictions for this specific claim combination are not visible here, whether because they do not exist yet or because they file under different classification codes.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| General Electric Company (GE) | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this analysis
A two-family corpus is a starting point for scoping, not a complete freedom-to-operate picture. The next steps widen the lens without losing the specificity that made this search useful.
Broaden the IPC scope
Add F01D5/28 subclasses more liberally and general composite-materials classes to catch lightweight-design work that was not classified under aircraft equipment codes.
Run a broader search in Eureka →Track the GE gap
Confirm whether the -100% year-on-year drop from General Electric Company (GE) reflects a real programme pause or simply unpublished recent filings.
Set up monitoring in Eureka →Check adjacent receiving offices
Query EPO and CNIPA filings for the same propulsor and weight-reduction terms to see whether the US-only pattern holds outside this dataset.
Expand jurisdiction coverage in Eureka →Common questions about this landscape
This specific search, combining open rotor or unducted fan terminology with lightweight-design, weight-reduction or composite-structure language under the relevant IPC classes, returns only two published patent families through the 2026 data cut-off. This is a narrow claim-scope search rather than a measure of all lightweight open rotor engineering activity, which almost certainly extends into broader materials and general aircraft-structure classifications not captured here. Anyone using this figure for competitive analysis should treat it as a floor and widen the search terms before drawing conclusions about overall activity levels.
Not based on this dataset. The filing trend is flat at zero through the 2022 midpoint, with the only activity appearing at the very end of the window in 2025. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, it is possible that more recent filings exist but have not yet published, so the true 2025–2026 activity level is likely understated rather than genuinely zero going forward.
The dataset identifies only one named assignee, General Electric Company (GE) (GE), which shows a -100% year-on-year drop in the latest year of momentum data. No second competitor surfaces in this specific claim scope, which suggests either genuine white space or that other engine makers file this type of work under different classification codes. A practitioner should not conclude the field has one dominant player without first broadening the IPC and keyword scope.
Both records in this corpus classify under B64D, the aircraft equipment subclass, with one also touching B64C, aeroplanes and helicopters. Neither record falls under F01D, the turbine-mechanics classification, despite it appearing in the search string, which indicates that the two filings in scope frame their claims around airframe integration and installed equipment rather than internal engine mechanics.
Based on the absence of dedicated claim sets in this corpus, several sub-areas look under-claimed: contra-rotating blade root attachment, composite pitch-change mechanism housings, acoustic-liner-integrated lightweight nacelles, hybrid metal-composite hub joints, and blade containment shielding specific to unducted configurations. None of these appear as focused claim language in the two records reviewed, which makes them candidates for a first-mover filing, though a full clearance search outside this narrow query is advisable before committing to any one of them.
Research Open Rotor Engine Lightweight Design in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole open rotor engine lightweight design 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.