As Earth's orbit becomes increasingly congested with thousands of active satellites and debris, the risk of catastrophic collisions is a growing concern for operators. A new analysis from Italian startup Ecosmic suggests its AI-powered platform, SAFE, significantly outperforms the U.S. government's widely used tracking system, highlighting a critical industry-wide push for greater accuracy in predicting potential disasters.
In a benchmark study of over 1,000 real conjunction alerts, Ecosmic reported its system generated zero false alarms, while the public Space-Track catalog produced 268 incorrect warnings and missed one critical event. This disparity underscores the intense competition among private firms to provide more reliable space situational awareness (SSA) data, a service essential for the modern space economy.
Key Takeaways
- Italian startup Ecosmic claims its AI-driven SAFE platform is more accurate than the U.S. government's Space-Track system.
- In a recent analysis, SAFE reportedly had zero false alerts, compared to 268 from Space-Track, and provided operators with an average of 12 hours more warning time.
- Private companies are using fused data from multiple sources and operator-provided maneuver plans to improve prediction accuracy.
- The industry faces a paradox where high-precision measurements can vary between providers due to different models, sensors, and assumptions.
- There is a growing call for greater transparency and collaboration to establish shared baselines for space traffic management.
A New Standard in Collision Avoidance
The challenge of navigating space is becoming a high-stakes mathematical problem. With tens of thousands of tracked objects circling the planet, even a small miscalculation can lead to a collision that generates thousands of new pieces of debris. Italian firm Ecosmic has released figures detailing the performance of its System to Avoid Fatal Events (SAFE) platform, offering a rare glimpse into the precision of next-generation tracking systems.
The company's analysis, conducted between December 2024 and July 2025, benchmarked its performance against Space-Track, the public catalog maintained by the U.S. Space Force and a global reference for orbital data. The results were stark: where Space-Track generated 268 false alerts, Ecosmic's system logged none. Furthermore, the analysis claimed Space-Track overlooked one critical conjunction during the period.
By the Numbers: Ecosmic vs. Space-Track
- False Alerts: SAFE - 0; Space-Track - 268
- Missed Critical Events: SAFE - 0; Space-Track - 1
- Alerts with >24hr Lead Time: SAFE - 75%; Space-Track - 68%
This increased accuracy translates directly into operational efficiency. Imane Marouf, Ecosmic's co-founder and chief commercial officer, explained the practical benefits of reducing this "noise."
"For a constellation of 50 satellites, that translates into dozens of working hours saved every week, fewer unnecessary maneuvers and far less operational stress, allowing teams to focus on real risks rather than noise."
According to Marouf, the SAFE platform also gave operators an average of 12 additional hours of lead time to analyze potential collisions and plan avoidance maneuvers. This extra time is crucial for making calm, calculated decisions that conserve fuel and extend the operational life of a satellite.
The Challenge of Data and Different Philosophies
While Ecosmic's results are notable, they are part of a broader industry trend where private companies are building on public data to offer more refined services. Space-Track primarily relies on the U.S. Space Force’s ground-based surveillance network, which provides a foundational but incomplete picture of the orbital environment.
Companies like Ecosmic and Colorado-based Kayhan Space improve upon this baseline by fusing data from multiple sources, including radar, optical telescopes, and passive RF sensors. More importantly, they incorporate data directly from satellite operators themselves.
Why Operator Data is Crucial
Satellite operators frequently perform maneuvers to adjust their orbits for station-keeping or to provide services. These planned movements are not immediately detectable by ground-based sensors. When operators share their future plans (ephemeris data), tracking platforms can predict an object's future position with much higher confidence, dramatically reducing false alarms.
Araz Feyzi, chief technology officer at Kayhan Space, likens the use of operator data to a car using its turn signals. “It’s the difference between turning with blinkers versus turning without,” he said. “Predictive data gives you context, not just observation, which leads to fewer false positives and more reliable [predictions].”
This collaborative approach is championed by organizations like the Space Data Association (SDA), a nonprofit group of satellite operators. The SDA acts as a neutral clearinghouse for members to share their sensitive orbital data. Joe Chan, the group's chairman, noted the importance of standardizing this information. He explained that different operators use different coordinate systems, and these small variations can lead to significant errors when calculating close approaches. The SDA converts all member data into a common reference frame to ensure consistency.
Hardware vs. Software: Competing for Precision
The market for space situational awareness is not monolithic. While some firms focus on sophisticated software and data fusion, others are investing heavily in proprietary hardware to gain an edge.
California-based LeoLabs, for example, operates its own global network of phased-array radars. The company states its network can deliver conjunction data within minutes, a significant improvement over the roughly eight-hour screening cadence of the public Space-Track system. This speed allows for more rapid and responsive decision-making.
Other companies, like Comspoc, emphasize advanced software techniques. Comspoc uses a sequential filtering method that continuously refines an object's orbital track as new measurements are received, improving the accuracy of its predictions over time.
The Precision Paradox
A central paradox exists in the SSA market: while every provider measures orbital positions with high precision, their results can differ. This is because each company uses a unique combination of sensors, analytical models, and underlying assumptions. The most accurate view of space can depend on who you ask—and when you ask them.
As the number of satellites in orbit continues to climb, driven by large constellations from companies like SpaceX and Amazon, the stakes have never been higher. Accuracy is no longer just a marketing buzzword; it is a fundamental requirement for safe and sustainable space operations.
The industry is now grappling with the need for greater transparency. Calls are growing for more collaboration and the establishment of shared baselines to ensure that all operators are working from a common, reliable picture of the orbital environment. Until that happens, satellite operators will continue to rely on a competitive marketplace of providers, each claiming to offer the clearest view of the dangers overhead.