Propulsive Booster Landing Patents: Who Leads, Trends 2026
Filing growth compares 2021 (117 records) with 2024 (245) — 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 1,665 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this patent landscape covers
This dataset tracks 1,665 published records matching propulsive booster landing terminology across engine, aircraft and spacecraft classifications between 2015 and mid-2026. The search string deliberately spans both the aerospace propulsion vocabulary (gas turbines, jet and reaction propulsion) and the newer spacecraft-recovery vocabulary, because propulsive landing claims in this corpus were built on decades of turbine and aircraft-engine patent language before reusable launch vehicles existed as a category. That mixed ancestry shows up directly in the IPC composition below.
Reading the numbers requires one caveat: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent one to two years in any trend understate real filing activity. The 2024 figure is the last one solid enough to anchor a growth statement; 2025 and 2026 will keep filling in as records publish.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 1,665-record corpus: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings climbed from 100 in 2017 to a peak of 288 in 2023, with 2021-2024 alone showing +109% growth (117 to 245). 2025 and 2026 figures are still incomplete due to publication lag and should not be read as a slowdown.
IPC subclass distribution
F02C (gas-turbine plants) appears in 50.4% of the 1,665 records, far ahead of B64D aircraft equipment (26.4%) and F01D turbines (21.3%). Spacecraft-specific B64G classification trails at 9.8%, and combustion-chamber-specific F23R sits at 6.7% — both signal narrower, more specialised claim territory than the broad engine classes above them.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,665 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Reusable Launch Vehicles: Propulsive Booster Landing Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about reusable launch vehicles: propulsive booster landing patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing and most-cited prior art
Sea landing of space launch vehicles and associated systems and methods (US20110017872A1)
Launch vehicle systems and methods for landing and recovering a booster stage and/or other portions thereof on a platform at sea or on another body of water are disclosed. In one embodiment, a reusable space launch vehicle is launched from a coastal launch site in a trajectory over water. After booster engine cutoff and upper stage separation, the booster stage reenters the earth's atmosphere in a tail-first orientation. The booster engines are then restarted and the booster stage performs a vertical powered landing on the deck of a pre-positioned sea-going platform.Filed by Blue Origin Manufacturing, LLC, 2011-01-27 — one of the earliest documented descriptions of vertical powered booster landing on a sea-based platform in this corpus.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20090152391A1 | Multibody aircrane | 399 |
| 2 | US20210108597A1 | Propulsion system architecture | 178 |
| 3 | US4976102A | Unducted, counterrotating gearless front fan engine | 170 |
| 4 | US4791783A | Convertible aircraft engine | 149 |
| 5 | US5794432A | Variable pressure and variable air flow turbofan engines | 137 |
| 6 | US5927653A | Two-stage reusable earth-to-orbit aerospace vehicle and transport system | 136 |
| 7 | US20100096491A1 | Rocket-powered entertainment vehicle | 112 |
| 8 | US6612522B1 | Flyback booster with removable rocket propulsion module | 107 |
| 9 | EP3048042A1 | Gas-electric propulsion system for an aircraft | 102 |
| 10 | US8157205B2 | Multibody aircrane | 96 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had more time to accumulate citations inside this searched corpus — treat them as a signal of influence on the field, not of current technical 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 filing strategy
Three signals stand out once the ranking, trend and classification data are read together.
A dominant core, not an open field
The five leading assignees account for 1,365 of the 1,665 records in scope. That level of concentration means new entrants are filing into claim space already staked out by incumbents with decades of turbine and aircraft-engine portfolios, not into an empty category.
Growth is real but recent-year data is incomplete
Filings nearly doubled from 117 in 2021 to 245 in 2024, with a peak of 288 in 2023. Because publication lags filing by around 18 months, the apparent dip in 2025-2026 reflects reporting lag rather than a genuine slowdown in R&D activity.
Engine-heritage claims outweigh spacecraft-specific ones
Half of all records touch F02C gas-turbine plant classification, while only 9.8% carry the dedicated B64G cosmonautics and spacecraft class. That gap suggests booster-landing claims are still largely framed through legacy propulsion classification rather than launch-vehicle-specific categories.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to reusable launch vehicles: propulsive booster landing patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio strategy, or spotting where to file next.
Map claim scope on the leading portfolio
With one assignee holding 616 of 1,665 records, a freedom-to-operate review should start by mapping exactly which claim elements that portfolio covers versus which are described but not claimed.
Explore assignee claims in EurekaTrack the spacecraft-specific classification separately
B64G records sit at only 9.8% of the corpus against F02C's 50.4% — worth monitoring as a distinct, thinner-filed branch rather than folding it into general propulsion analysis.
Set up IPC tracking in EurekaRevisit 2025-2026 filings once they mature
Because publication lag understates the last one to two years, any strategic read on current-year momentum should be rechecked in six to twelve months as more records publish.
Monitor filing trends in EurekaFrequently asked questions
One assignee leads the ranked field with 616 of the 1,665 records in scope, well ahead of the fifth-ranked assignee at 52 and the tenth-ranked at 12. This steep gradient means the field is concentrated rather than evenly distributed, so a competitive review should focus first on the leading portfolio's specific claim scope rather than treating the field as fragmented. The top 5 assignees combined account for 82.0% of all records, and the top 10 for 88.5%, leaving a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants below that line.
Yes, based on the last complete data: filings grew from 117 in 2021 to 245 in 2024, a +109% increase, with a peak of 288 records in 2023. Figures for 2025 and 2026 appear lower, but that reflects the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication rather than an actual decline in R&D activity. Any conclusion about current-year momentum should wait until those recent years finish publishing.
The corpus spans engine, aircraft and spacecraft classifications, with F02C (gas-turbine plants) the largest at 50.4% of the 1,665 records, followed by B64D (aircraft equipment) at 26.4% and F01D (turbines and non-positive engines) at 21.3%. Spacecraft-specific classification B64G (cosmonautics and spacecraft) appears in only 9.8% of records, and combustion-chamber-specific F23R in 6.7%. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% and should not be summed.
US20110017872A1, filed by Blue Origin Manufacturing in 2011, describes launching from a coastal site, tail-first atmospheric reentry, booster engine restart, and vertical powered landing on a sea-going platform with bidirectional aerodynamic control surfaces. A design that combines all of those elements — sea-platform landing specifically, engine restart after cutoff, and bidirectional glide control surfaces together — sits closest to what this filing describes. Land-based vertical landing, or sea landing without the tail-first reentry and restart sequence, is a materially different combination and warrants its own claim-by-claim comparison rather than assuming blanket coverage.
The clearest gaps sit in branches that are described in prior art but thinly claimed relative to the core engine classifications: sea-platform landing guidance, tail-first reentry attitude control, bidirectional aerodynamic glide surfaces, vertical powered landing restart sequencing, and booster-stage thermal protection for reentry. These sub-areas trail far behind the 50.4% claim density in F02C gas-turbine plants, suggesting narrower, more defensible filing opportunities than the crowded general propulsion classes. Any first claim written into these branches should tie specifically to the sea-based or restart-sequence combination rather than restating general vertical-landing language already covered by earlier filings.
Research Reusable Launch Vehicles: Propulsive Booster Landing Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole reusable launch vehicles: propulsive booster landing patent landscape 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.