Space Debris & Orbital Object Tracking
Commercial referenceDEF-035
Orbital-object conjunction and debris-evidence technology for satellite operators, space-safety teams and qualified sovereign programs.
Who this is for
Satellite operators, space-safety organizations, launch and mission teams, insurers and qualified sovereign integrators.
The problem you already have
A maneuvering object and a tumbling one can look the same in a single track — trajectory deformation is what tells them apart
Detecting that an object's trajectory has actually deformed from its expected orbit — not just that its position changed — is what separates a real maneuver signature from ordinary orbital noise, and that distinction has to be made explicitly, not assumed.
Every debris and conjunction assessment reports intent as unknown, on purpose
A tracked object's intent is labeled unknown by default, not inferred from its behavior — because guessing intent from trajectory data is exactly the kind of overclaim that damages credibility with oversight the first time it's wrong.
This works from orbital-state and uncertainty data, not tasking access
Never requested, and structurally rejected if submitted: classified sensor-tasking data, live satellite command access, or tracking-source raw data outside the evidence contract.
Real-World Operational Scenario: The Avoidance Maneuver That Traded One Collision Risk for Another
Scenario: A flight-dynamics team proposes a maneuver to avoid a predicted close approach with Object A.
Object A is inside the critical risk threshold, and the proposed burn increases the miss distance with it to a safe margin.
WITHOUT this check: The maneuver is approved because it solves the Object A problem. Nobody re-screens the new predicted trajectory against the rest of the catalog before executing — the burn moves the satellite onto a path that now brings it within critical range of Object B, which wasn't a concern before the maneuver.
WITH this check: The predicted post-maneuver orbit is screened against the full downstream conjunction picture before the maneuver is authorized. If the new trajectory creates an unresolved conjunction with Object B, the maneuver is held for revision instead of being executed as a fix that just replaced one collision risk with another.
What BivectorAI Provides
Position Change Alone Never Means Maneuver
Trajectory deformation, not just position change, is what confirms an actual propulsive maneuver versus tumbling or perturbation.
Solving One Conjunction Doesn't Authorize the Maneuver
The predicted post-maneuver orbit is screened against the full catalog for new downstream conjunctions before a proposed avoidance maneuver is treated as safe.
Intent Is Always Labeled Unknown
This is unconditional for every space-domain output, maneuver or not — disagreement between tracking sources is preserved as evidence, not silently resolved.
Evidence for Analyst Review, Not a Targeting or Command Output
Outputs are tracking certificates for human review, never targeting solutions or autonomous collision-avoidance commands.
Prove the Gate Before Broader Integration (Zero-Risk Evaluation)
Do not buy the claim. Test the gate.
Feed a synthetic tumbling event with a position change that could be mistaken for a maneuver, and separately a proposed avoidance maneuver whose predicted post-burn orbit creates a new, unscreened conjunction. It succeeds only if it distinguishes tumbling from maneuver, and holds the second maneuver for revision instead of authorizing it.
This initial trial measures maneuver-vs-tumbling discrimination accuracy and downstream-conjunction screening completeness. Commercial scale-up occurs only after measured results prove value in your own lab environment.
What you provide
Redacted orbital-state vectors, tracking-source metadata, and uncertainty estimates already produced by your tracking pipeline. No classified sensor-tasking data is required.
What BivectorAI actually hands you
Evidence package
- conjunction classification
- orbital-regime evidence
- uncertainty and provenance records
- reviewable space-safety certificates
Integration package
Customer-safe input/output contract, local/private integration boundary, validation fixtures and reviewable evidence artifacts.
Deployment model
Qualified local, private or on-premise integration. No public Defense API and no uncontrolled public execution surface.
Technical disclosure
Customer-visible behavior and evidence are disclosed. Confidential implementation details, protected core methods and internal technical data are not published.
What we will never ask you for
Never requested, and structurally rejected if submitted: classified sensor-tasking parameters, live satellite command access, or tracking-source raw data outside the evidence contract, or your system's core design data. Every submission is checked against this rejection list before any evidence logic runs — a malformed or over-broad submission is blocked and reported back to you, not silently processed.
How it actually runs
Engagement path & current acquisition terms
DEF-035 · Tier C — Strategic Sensing / Infrastructure
Secures a defined diligence and exclusive-negotiation period. Any option credit is agreed in writing as part of the signed commercial terms.
Starting integration engineering, customer-safe adaptation, local/private deployment work, validation and acceptance evidence for the agreed environment.
Scope-dependent consideration for negotiated exclusivity in a defined field, program, platform class, territory and rights scope.
Engineering support, update access, security maintenance, evidence infrastructure and agreed sustainment services.
Applied to attributable net program revenue under the definitive agreement, subject to negotiated exclusions and accounting rules.
Commercial boundary. These are indicative starting terms, not a binding offer. Final price depends on exclusivity scope, field of use, territory, sublicensing, technical-data rights, integration obligations, export-control review, support requirements and definitive agreement.
IP boundary. Exclusive FOU does not automatically transfer ownership of BivectorAI Background IP. Worldwide/all-defense rights, sublicensing, source-level technical-data rights or assignment require separate negotiated consideration.
Scope the DEF-035 diligence and integration boundary
Request DEF-035 Acquisition Discussion →Email fallback: contact@bivectorai.com
Defense technology is integrated through qualified local/private engagement. No public Defense API and no automated Defense checkout are provided.