Space Propulsion Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- 183 records, 10.8% of the field, sit with the top five filers out of 1,692 records in scope — concentrated, but far from a monopoly.
- Cosmonautics and spacecraft claims (B64G) cover 52.8% of records, while plasma and ion propulsion (F03H) sits at 14.8% — a much smaller, more open sub-field.
- Filings fell 58% from 2021's peak of 122 to 51 in 2024, the last year publication lag lets us read cleanly.
Filing growth compares 2021 (122 records) with 2024 (51) — 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 1,692 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks 1,692 patent records published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine space or spacecraft propulsion art with orbital, attitude-control or ground-station functionality — the intersection where propulsion hardware meets the guidance and mission-management systems that make it usable. Records span classical chemical propulsion, jet and reaction engines, and plasma or ion thrusters, cross-referenced against control and payload claims. The scope favours records where propulsion and spacecraft operations are claimed together, not propulsion components in isolation.
Coverage runs through a 2026-08-31 data cut-off, but because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the last one to two years understate true filing activity. The 2024 filing count is the most recent figure that can be read as complete.
Filing trends and technology composition
Filing volumes and IPC composition drawn from the 1,692 records in scope, shown across the full 2015-2026 window and across the eight IPC subclasses with the most coverage.
Filings rose to a 2021 peak, then eased
Annual filings climbed from 94 in 2017 to a peak of 122 in 2021, then declined to 51 by 2024 — a 58% drop over that span. 2025 and 2026 figures are still filling in under normal publication lag and should not be read as a continued decline.
Cosmonautics dominates, plasma propulsion is the largest niche
B64G (cosmonautics and spacecraft) appears on 52.8% of the 1,692 records, more than double the next subclass, F02K (jet and reaction propulsion) at 25.8%. F03H (plasma and ion propulsion), at 14.8%, is the largest sub-field that sits meaningfully below the two leaders — worth watching given its smaller claim density. Explosives, propellants and gas-generating compositions (C06B, C06D) each sit near 6%, marking narrower, more specialised claim territory.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,692 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Space Propulsion Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about space propulsion patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaA representative recent filing
Module-based automatically separable space propulsion system apparatus and design method therefor
The application describes a modular propulsion apparatus in which a storage-and-supply module connects, via separation interfaces, to an orbital-maneuvering engine module on one end and an attitude-control engine module on the other. The storage module feeds propellant to both; the orbital module delivers maneuvering thrust and the attitude module delivers control thrust, with the separation interfaces allowing the modules to detach from one another.Filed by Shanghai Institute of Space Propulsion, published 2026-06-25.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6056237A | Sonotube compatible unmanned aerial vehicle and system | 795 |
| 2 | US7141812B2 | Devices, methods, and systems involving castings | 298 |
| 3 | US20110189440A1 | Systems, Devices, and/or Methods for Manufacturing Castings | 289 |
| 4 | US20170250751A1 | System for planetary-scale analytics | 280 |
| 5 | US9315663B2 | Systems, devices, and/or methods for manufacturing castings | 201 |
| 6 | US7785098B1 | Systems for large area micro mechanical systems | 169 |
| 7 | US6032904A | Multiple usage thruster mounting configuration | 157 |
| 8 | WO2024042508A1 | Geosynchronization of an aerial image using localizing multiple features | 147 |
| 9 | US6193187B1 | Payload carry and launch system | 141 |
| 10 | US4838021A | Electrostatic ion thruster with improved thrust modulation | 141 |
Citation counts reflect influence within this searched corpus and skew toward older records; they are not a measure of current commercial relevance.
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 patterns stand out once the raw counts are read against their denominators: concentration is moderate, one sub-field carries most of the claim density, and the recent-year dip is a publication artefact rather than a genuine slowdown.
Leadership is present but not dominant
The five leading assignees hold 183 records between them, only 10.8% of the field. Extending to ten filers adds relatively little, reaching 19.9% — so most of the landscape sits with assignees outside the ranked leaders, including many single- or few-filing entrants.
Cosmonautics claims dominate, but overlap widely
More than half of all records touch B64G (cosmonautics and spacecraft), and many of those also carry F02K or F03H classes, reflecting how propulsion claims are typically bundled with spacecraft-operations claims in this corpus rather than filed as standalone hardware.
Volume has eased from its 2021 high
Filings peaked at 122 in 2021 and fell to 51 by 2024, a 58% decline over three years. That is the most recent period that publication lag lets us read reliably; 2025-2026 counts will continue to rise as more filings publish.
US and Europe anchor filing activity
The United States receiving office accounts for the largest single share of records at 716, with Europe (EPO) and WIPO/PCT filings following. Japan and Australia each carry a smaller but non-trivial share of the corpus.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to space propulsion patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Assignee landscape and where the openings sit
The ranked leaders hold a modest combined share of the field, and recent-year momentum data shows several long-established names with no filings in the latest year — a sign that some of this territory is currently unattended rather than permanently claimed.
A single leader, no runaway gap
The top-ranked assignee holds 39 records against a fifth-place count of 35 and a tenth-place count of 30 — a gentle taper rather than a cliff, meaning the leader's position is strong but not insulated from the next tier of filers.
Most of the field sits outside the ranked leaders
With the top ten filers holding only 19.9% of the 1,692 records, the remaining 80.1% is spread across the rest of the ranking and unranked filers — evidence of a fragmented field where a well-drafted claim still has room to stand out.
Some established names have gone quiet
Several assignees with a long filing history show zero filings in the latest year in the dataset. That could reflect a strategic pause, a shift to trade-secret protection, or simply publication lag on their most recent applications — it is worth checking their filing history before assuming they have exited.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO) | 0 | — |
| Aerojet General Corp | 0 | — |
| Mitsubishi Electric Corp | 0 | — |
| Raytheon Co | 0 | — |
| TRW Inc. (US) | 0 | — |
| Boeing Co | 0 | — |
| ECAPS | 0 | — |
| AEROSPACE CORP | 0 | — |
Where to take this from here
The dataset points to a fragmented field with one dominant claim cluster and several thinner sub-areas. The next step is usually to check a specific claim set or filer against your own roadmap rather than read the aggregate numbers alone.
Check freedom-to-operate against the leader's claims
With the top filer holding 39 records and no dominant single owner beyond that, a targeted claims review against the leading assignees is more useful than a general clearance search.
Run a claims check in EurekaTrack quiet assignees before assuming they've exited
Several long-standing filers show zero filings in the latest year. Before treating that as an opening, confirm whether their pipeline has simply not published yet.
Monitor assignee activity in EurekaDraft around the under-claimed sub-areas
Plasma/ion power conditioning and modular separable propulsion interfaces carry thinner claim density than the dominant cosmonautics cluster, and may offer more room for a defensible first claim.
Explore white space in EurekaCommon questions on space propulsion patents
The top-ranked assignee in this dataset holds 39 of the 1,692 records in scope, with the fifth-ranked filer at 35 and the tenth at 30. That gentle taper means no single company dominates the field outright; the top five combined hold only 10.8% of all records, and the top ten hold 19.9%. Most of the landscape sits with assignees outside that ranked group, including many with only one or two filings.
Filings rose from 94 in 2017 to a peak of 122 in 2021, then fell to 51 by 2024, a 58% decline over that three-year span. Because patent publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 counts in any dataset are still incomplete and should not be read as evidence of a continuing drop. 2024 is the most recent year that can be treated as a reliable data point.
Cosmonautics and spacecraft claims (IPC class B64G) appear on 52.8% of the 1,692 records in scope, making it by far the largest single category. Jet and reaction propulsion (F02K) follows at 25.8%, and plasma or ion propulsion (F03H) at 14.8% is the largest sub-field sitting clearly below the top two. Because records often carry multiple IPC classes, these shares overlap rather than sum to 100%.
The thinner-coverage areas in this dataset include plasma and ion thruster power conditioning, gas-generating attitude-control compositions, and modular separable propulsion interfaces — all sitting well below the dominant B64G and F02K claim density. Thin coverage signals room for a well-drafted first claim, not that the underlying technology is unproven. A freedom-to-operate check against the leading assignees' existing claims is still the right first step before filing there.
The United States receiving office accounts for the largest share of records in this dataset at 716, ahead of Europe (EPO) at 251 and WIPO under the PCT at 197. Israel, Australia and Japan each contribute a smaller but meaningful share. These figures count records by receiving office, not by the applicant's home country, so they reflect where protection was sought rather than where the invention originated.
Research Space Propulsion Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole space propulsion 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.