Figure 48.

1 The Ekranoplan (WIG Craft) Orlyonok in Flight

 Chapter 48
Wing In Ground (WIG) Craft

Karsten Fach, Hanno Fischer, Nikolai Kornev, and Ulf Petersen

48.1 INTRODUCTION km/h on the sea or Great Lakes. WIG craft can close the
gap between fast but expensive air transport, and cheap but
A Wing In Ground (WIG) Craft/Airfoilboat/Ekranoplan
slow water transport, as shown in Figure 48.2.
utilizes the so-called ground effect, in which lift increases
The power requirement of different transport systems
compared to a wing in free flight, if the distance to the
versus speed and in comparison with a Volkswagen car
ground H measured from the trailing edge is less than 30%
(Figure 48.3) impressively shows the economy of WIG
of the mean aerodynamic chord. Provided that the aerody-
craft. The degree of efficiency is indicated by the von Kar-
namic arrangement of a WIG craft is properly designed,
man Gabrielli diagram as per Figure 48.4. It is clearly seen
the drag also is reduced for a certain range of attack angles
that various systems with good L/D ratios are available
α when H tends to zero. In all cases the lift-to-drag ratio
below a speed of approximately 35 knots, while faster ve-
(L/D) is increased even if the drag increases. The L/D ratio
hicles are limited to L/D ratios from 5 to 15. WIG craft can
can be improved by a factor of approximately 2, or even
close the gap while still having potential for future im-
more, at the minimum possible height of flight. For com-
provements.
parison, the L/D ratio of WIG craft can approach the value
Some commercial applications of WIGs are presently
of 30 in close proximity to the ground whereas the maxi-
being considered in Germany, Russia, China, Japan,
mum L/D of a transonic airliner is only about 20.
France, Australia and the United States.
A few samples of utilization of the ground effect can be
found in the nature. For instance, it is used by heavy sea
birds and flying fish for efficient long-distance flights over
water. Ground effect is also known to pilots of seaplanes as
a way to increase the range of the aircraft. For instance, the
well-known German flying boat DO-X flew a long time
under ground effect during the first part of its transatlantic
flight in 1929.
One of the earliest WIGs was the Ekranoplan Orlyonok
shown in Figure 48.1. It was designed by Dr. R. Alexeyev
in 1974.

48.2 MISSION
Speeds of surface transportation on land (car and rail) are
in the range of 100 km/h, but decrease to approximately 25 Figure 48.2 Transport Expenses versus Speed

48-1
48-2 Ship Design & Construction, Volume 2

the long rides to and from airports when travelling by air-

plane. Only for distances above 1000 km can the shorter
direct travel time with aircraft, offset the time used to
travel to and from the airports.
A remarkable advantage of WIG craft in comparison to
conventional vessels is the fact that they are stable when
cruising above the water without vertical movement or
rolling, which eliminates passenger and crew seasickness.
Due to the high cruise speed, WIGs can avoid bad weather
when they are not designed to survive such weather. If the
craft is designed to cruise over higher waves, the structure
can be designed to allow an emergency landing even in
Figure 48.3 The Power Requirement of Different Transport Systems versus waves of up to 20% of the wingspan, without endangering
Speed and in Comparison to a Volkswagen Car the passengers or the vessel.
Another advantage of these craft is the fact that the re-
quirement for redundant systems would be low compared
to aircraft, as WIGs are always cruising above their land-
ing strip.
High maneuverability with steep turn radii for obstacle
avoidance maneuvers are possible for WIG craft, due to
their ability to bank during coordinated turns. A temporary
increase of height is possible by using the craft’s kinetic
energy of cruise speed in order to have the ability for ver-
tical obstacle avoidance, which would further increase
safety.
Inherent height stability can be safeguarded by proper
aerodynamic design, but additional systems for obstacle
detection during operation in poor visibility or operation at
night will probably be required in the future as the size of
WIGs increase.
Due to the registration as a ship and not as an aircraft,
the operators do not require a pilot’s license, but additional
education in order to safely maneuver these unique fast
craft.
As on any water-based craft, the allowable sea state is
mainly determined by the size of the craft. According to
the present state of the art in WIG design, the wave height
Figure 48.4 The Karman Gabrieli Diagram
for takeoff should not exceed 5% of the wingspan, and for
economical cruise not more than 10% of wingspan. At re-
duced economy, a cruise height of up to 20% of the
wingspan is acceptable from the viewpoint of safety.
Beside the transport of passengers and goods, there are
48.3 UNIQUE FEATURES AND CAPABILITIES
many feasible applications for WIGs in paramilitary oper-
The suitable speed range of WIG craft according to present ations for customs, police, coast guard, and also for search
technology may reach approximately 230 km/h, while the and rescue, medical services, etc.
takeoff speed should not be significantly higher than 130
km/h.
Market research indicates that with this cruise speed
48.4 GENERAL ARRANGEMENTS
range, WIGs enable shorter travelling times than aircraft,
because any harbor can be used by WIGs with minimal The wing arrangements of WIG craft can be subdivided
changes to the infrastructure, so that there is no need for into the following five groups: 1) ekranoplans of the first
 Chapter 48: Wing In Ground (WIG) Craft 48-3

Figure 48.7 The 400 Ton Attack WIG Craft Lun

cludes: the main wing of small or moderate aspect ratio (2

Figure 48.5 Basic Wing Arrangements of WIG Craft: 1-1st Generation Ekra- to 3), end plates, fuselage and tail unit. A large high tail is
noplan, 2-2nd Generation Ekranoplan, 3-Lippish, 4- Tandem, and 5-Volga characteristic for the first generation.
The development of the second-generation ekranoplans
generation, 2) ekranoplans of the second generation, 3) started in the 1970s with the goal to improve the efficiency
Lippish and its variations, 4) tandem, and 5) Volga type of the first generation. These craft, whose development
(Figure 48.5). was stopped due to economic difficulties in the 1980s,
Under leadership of an outstanding engineer, Dr. Alex- have an enlarged total aspect ratio (up to 6), inflatable
eyev, various WIG arrangements were tested during four floating elements and a smaller tail unit. Stability is en-
decades of WIG development in Russia, starting from the sured by the application of S-shaped profiles and an im-
tandem configurations through to ekranoplans of the first proved wing arrangement. The improved wing design al-
and second generations and finally also the modern small lowed the reduction of wing area of the tail unit from 50 to
machines of today like the Volga 2 and Amphistar. The 25% of the main wing area. The inflatable floats reduce the
Russian ekranoplans, developed by the Alexeyev Bureau load factor in takeoff/landing mode and improve amphibi-
from the 1960s to the 1980s, have huge dimensions and ous properties of the WIG craft.
weights and are able to start from rough seas with wave The latest Russian developments represented by civil
heights up to 3.5 meters (see the KM, 1966, in Figure 48.6 craft Volga 2 in 1980 (Figure 48.8), also designed by the
and Lun, 1987, in Figure 48.7). Alexeyev bureau, and Aquaglide in 1995 (Figure 48.9) uti-
After many tests the tandem configuration was ex- lize advantages of the second generation of ekranoplans.
cluded in the sixties from the next development due to They have a S-shaped wing profile and inflatable floats.
problems with maneuverability, low stability at large and Moreover, these craft are permanently moving in the
moderate heights of flight and excessive sensibility of the regime of power augmentation (PAR) whereas the ekra-
craft to free surface perturbations. noplans of the first and second generations use PAR only
The wing arrangements of well-known Russian ekra-
noplans KM, Orlyonok (Figure 48.1), and Lun (Figure
48.7) designed and built in the 1960s to the 1980s belongs
to the first generation, in which the wing arrangement in-

Figure 48.6 The 500 Ton WIG Craft KM Figure 48.8 The 8 Passenger WIG Craft Volga 2
48-4 Ship Design & Construction, Volume 2

Shipping Register is now ready for promotion to the mar-

ket.
An outstanding contribution to the WIG technology
was also made by famous German aerodynamicist, Dr.
Lippisch, the inventor of the delta wing. He developed a
series of very successful wing configurations called the
Lippish configurations.
The Lippish configuration consists of a reversed delta
wing (with aspect ratio of about 2), fuselage, two floats,
winglets and tail unit. His first WIG designs X113, X114
and X114h (with retractable hydrofoils) were intended for
military application. As these craft were able for free flight,
Figure 48.9 The 4 Passenger WIG Craft Aquaglide they had to be designed and registered as aircraft, and had
to fulfil the aeronautical load assumptions.
as a starting aid. The power augmentation is created by The further development of Lippish configurations was
stagnation of the air being blown out by the engines lo- made by German firms Rheinflugzeugbau, Fischer Flug-
cated at the bow of craft and it can only be supplied in ex- mechanik, and Airfoil Development (Figure 48.10) under
treme ground effect, which makes such craft able to fly the leadership of Mr. H. Fischer. With the Airfish Technol-
only at low altitudes. The plan form of the main wing of al- ogy, developed by Fischer Flugmechanik, the free flight
most all Russian ekranoplans is either rectangular or trape- ability was avoided, which enabled their registration as
zoid. The ekranoplan Aquaglide certified by the Russian boats for the test craft Airfish-1, 2 and 3. The sister com-

Figure 48.10 Development of WIG Craft of the Lippish Configurations in Germany

 Chapter 48: Wing In Ground (WIG) Craft 48-5

pany AFD Airfoil Development GmbH developed the WIG and ACV. A two-seater test craft, the Hoverwin—2VT
8-seater WIG craft Airfish-8 according to a specification (Figure 48.10), scaled down by a factor of 3.35 from the
given by their Singapore customer. Under the designation projected 80-seat ferry for the Baltic Sea, has been built
Flightship 8, the craft has now been delivered to Australia, and all required and predicted performance and character-
where licensed production will take place. This craft was istics of the Hoverwing technology have been validated
the first WIG craft certified by Germansicher Lloyd. with the craft.
The next significant achievement was the development A most significant success is the development of the
of the Hoverwing concept, which is a hybrid between a Tandem configurations by German engineer, G. Jörg (Fig-
ure 48.11), who designed and tested a series of tandem
boats called TAF. A few of the TAF boats were sold in dif-
ferent countries.
Since the wing arrangements of other existing WIG
craft fall under the five types mentioned previously, they
are not listed here.
Figure 48.12 shows the general arrangement for the
WIG craft Airfish 8.

48.5 HYDRODYNAMICS
The waterborne regime of WIG craft includes the follow-
Figure 48.11 The Tandem WIG Craft TAF VIII-2 Jörg IV ing phases:

Figure 48.12 General Arrangement of the WIG Craft Airfish 8

48-6 Ship Design & Construction, Volume 2

• displacement regime, WIG project. Some simple theoretical models can be

• transitional regime, found in reference 1. During the planing mode and at a cer-
• pure planing, and tain runway speed range the WIG craft can experience the
• planing with dynamic support caused by the power planing instability (porpoising), which quickly disappears
augmentation or air cushion. with increasing speed.
During the transitional regime and planing, the attitude
and displacement of a WIG change rapidly making it diffi-
48.6 TAKEOFF
cult to use tried experimental material gained for conven-
tional planing ships. Because the weight of the vessel is re- To overcome the hump-drag, even best designed skimming
distributing continuously in time between airfoil, hydrofoil surfaces require approximately 2.3 times more power than
(if present) and planing hull, it becomes impossible to de- necessary for ground effect cruise, thus requiring high
termine the Froude number specifying characteristics of power for a short time only, which raises weight and oper-
planing. Another difficulty is caused by the complicated ating expenses. Figure 48.13 shows tested devices to work
stepped form of the fuselage bottom (Figure 48.12) and as takeoff aids, in order to decrease this hump-drag.
chines. Russian ekranoplanes successfully use power augmen-
The steps have a dual purpose. First, they reduce the tation as a takeoff aid, wherein the jet blowing out of the
wetted area of the bottom, and second, the hull with steps bow engines is deflected under the main wing, resulting in
is planing on a number of surfaces, which effectively in- a lift that decreases the displacement of the craft.
creases the aspect ratio in relation to the hull without steps. Prediction of the power augmentation is one of the
Moreover, the steps prevent suction effect occurring on challenging problems of WIG aerodynamics. Some simple
convex planing surfaces due to decrease of the dynamic 2D models proposed by Russian engineers, Privalov (2)
pressure. and Gallington can be used to qualitatively estimate the
Since the hydrodynamic characteristics of the stepped power augmentation. However, the greatest contribution to
bottom depend essentially on the step geometry and its this field was made by using experimental methods. Figure
arrangement, there are no universal experimental data ap- 48.14 illustrates the efficiency of power augmentation for
plicable for design. Practically, the hydrodynamic design wings of different aspect ratio, with end plates and for dif-
of WIG craft has been made mostly on the basis of sepa- ferent jet configurations. The smaller the aspect ratio the
rate tests carried out in high-speed towing tanks for each more effective the power augmentation. The lift-to-drag

Figure 48.13 Takeoff Aids of the WIG Craft

 Chapter 48: Wing In Ground (WIG) Craft 48-7

Figure 48.15 The Hoverwing Concept

volume for payload. Figure 48.16 shows the patent pro-

tected Hoverwing principle.
Figure 48.17 shows the improvement in power require-
ment of the Hoverwing technology versus speed.
Retractable hydrofoils were used as a takeoff aid on the
Figure 48.14 Additional Lift ∆Y Caused by Power Augmentation versus WIG Craft X114h and Hydrowing (Germany). A hydro ski
Froude Number for Different Wing and Jet Arrangements. P is the Thrust of was used on the WIG craft Orlyonok to reduce the load fac-
Exhausting Engines, and S is the Wing Area. tor during landing.
Takeoff is a very critical regime for WIG craft. At the
moment of detachment, contact with the water disappears
ratio for the wing with aspect ratio of 1.0 is about 11 at zero and at that instant the stability of motion is not provided
pitch angle and about 5 at a pitch angle of 6 degrees. Up to any more due to the loss of the strong hydrodynamic
6 tonnes of lift can be utilized from 1 tonne of thrust pro- damping. The risk of the pitch-up tendency during takeoff
duced by a blowing engine during the power augmentation can be reduced by proper position of the center of gravity
regime. In spite of many disadvantages, the power aug- and by the correct piloting strategy. The pilot of the WIG
mentation is possibly the only way to secure the takeoff of craft must have skill to bring the WIG smoothly from the
large WIG craft (weight >100 tonne) in rough sea condi- skimming into the flare mode.
tions. Depending on the design, the mutual disposition of the
Another idea for a takeoff aid is the use of a static air drag and thrust curves can be of two types (Figure 48.18).
cushion. This idea was implemented in the Russian exper- In the first case (Drag 1) the thrust is counterbalanced by
imental WIG craft ELA 01, in 1978, by use of an additional the drag without any pilot actions at point A. In the second
ventilator built into the fuselage. A really ingenious solu- case (Drag 2), at the moment of detachment the pilot has to
tion was found by designers of the Hoverwing WIG craft reduce the thrust from full-throttle to a setting providing a
developed by Fischer Flugmechanik, wherein a small por- stable flare motion at a given height of flight (point C). The
tion of the propeller stream is deflected and guided in be- second case is typical for small WIG craft and the safe per-
tween the catamaran hulls, where a static air-cushion is formance of the takeoff is a real problem for inexperienced
built up. pilots.
This air cushion supports 80% of the craft weight even
when stationary. By means of skirts, as used on SES craft,
the static pressure can be maintained until takeoff. The
48.7 AERODYNAMICS
Hoverwing concept is the bridge between WIG and ACV
(Figure 48.15). When the wing approaches the ground, the air under the
At takeoff, the dynamic air pressure replaces the static wing experiences a full or partial stagnation depending on
air pressure, and the sealing skirts are retracted automati- gap between the wing and the ground. Theoretically, the
cally. By designing the fuselage to have an airfoil shape, pressure coefficient can attain the value of 1.0 representing
40% of the total lift in ground effect is produced by the full stagnation. While about two thirds of the lift of a wing
fuselage, which at the same time offers an extremely large section far from the ground is generated by suction on the
48-8 Ship Design & Construction, Volume 2

Figure 48.18 Typical Disposition of the Drag and Thrust Curves

upper side of the airfoil, the increase of lift of the airfoil in

ground effect takes place mostly on the lower side. Usu-
ally, the lower side of the WIG foil profiles along the ma-
jority of the chord is flat, in order to avoid the venturi
effect, which would result in the appearance of a low pres-
sure area when the lower side is convex (Figure 48.19),
which in turn leads to a suction force.
A typical S-shaped wing section for WIG craft (the
DHMTU family) with a flat lower side and S-shaped cam-
ber line is presented in Figure 48.20. The possible values
of parameters for generating the profile are given in Table
48.I.

Figure 48.16 The Principle of the Hoverwing Technology

Figure 48.19 Illustration of the Venturi Effect

Figure 48.17 Advantage of Hoverwing Compared to a Conventional WIG

Figure 48.20 A Typical Wing Section of WIG Craft

 Chapter 48: Wing In Ground (WIG) Craft 48-9

TABLE 48.I Profile Parameters

tu xt x1 tl1 tl2 x2 δ

6–12 30–40 10 1–3 1–3 30–50 15–21

In ground effect, the lift is drastically increased

whereas the drag is decreased (Figure 48.21). However,
the latter property is not absolute and depends on the wing
arrangement and the angle of attack. Anyway, the lift-to-
drag ratio grows almost in all cases and can theoretically
attain the value of 30 or even higher. Unfortunately, the
form of the fuselage of WIG craft designed to support the
takeoff and landing regimes is rather far from the optimal
aerodynamic form, so the actual lift-to-drag ratio of exist-
ing WIG does not exceed values of 13 to17.
As a rule the fuselage influence results in a decrease of
the L/D ratio, whereas the tail unit only slightly improves
the L/D ratio when at the positive angle of attack. The end
plates contribute both by increasing the lift and by de-
creasing the induced drag.
A typical dependence of the lift coefficient on the pitch
angle is shown in Figure 48.22. The noticeable effect of
the ground influence is the convexity of curves CL(ϑ),
CLϑϑ < 0.
For some wing arrangements of small aspect ratio the
superposition of convexity caused by the ground effect
with the concavity caused by the tip vortices (CL – ϑ2) re-
sults in the almost linear dependence of the lift coefficient
on the pitch angle.
Aerodynamic characteristics are essentially dependent
on the WIG arrangement. The total aspect ratio has the
most significant influence on aerodynamic properties. In-
creasing the aspect ratio is the most effective way to im-
prove the lift-to-drag ratio. The effective aspect ratio of
WIG craft can be essentially enlarged by endplates, which
can also function as floats.
Enlarging the aspect ratio as a way to increase the L/D
ratio is a specific feature of the second generation of Rus-
sian ekranoplans. To make the power augmentation effec-
tive, Russian designers use a centerplane of small or mod-
erate aspect ratio. The increase of the aspect ratio up to 5 or
6 is achieved then by use of side consoles with tip endplates
contributing both to the decrease of induced drag and im-
provement of the maneuverability in the horizontal plane.
Besides the stationary aerodynamic characteristics CD,
CL, L/D, and Cm there are a number of steady and unsteady Figure 48.21 Drag CD and Lift CL Coefficients and the Lift to Drag Ratio L/D
derivatives playing important roles for estimation of sta- versus the Nondimensional Height of Flight h=H/c for Different Angles of At-
bility and dynamic properties of WIG craft. Under ground tack for a Lippish Configuration
48-10 Ship Design & Construction, Volume 2

achievable by modern WIG craft. The influence of the

wave surface deformation caused by the dynamic air cush-
ion under the wing is insignificant. However, it has to be
considered for prediction of takeoff when aided by using
the air cushion or power augmentation at small Froude
numbers (Fn ~ 0.7) (see Figure 48.14).
In spite of rapid development of numerical methods,
experimental methods remain the most reliable.
A full cycle of experimental WIG aerodynamics re-
search proceeds in four steps: 1) wind tunnel measure-
ments, 2) tests either with radio-controlled models or cat-
apulted models, 3) piloted self-propelled models, and 4)
full-scale trials. The ground effect in wind tunnels is mod-
elled either by the use of mirror images or by a horizontal
rigid plate (Figure 48.24). In the latter case the actual
boundary condition on the ground is violated.
The velocity on the ground is zero in the coordinate sys-
Figure 48.22 The Lift Coefficient CL versus the Pitch Angle ϑ for Different
tem connected with the model, whereas in reality it is equal
Nondimensional Heights of Flight h
to the speed of motion, but with the opposite sign. The
boundary layer developed along the plate makes measure-
ment inaccurate at small heights of flight. To overcome this
problem either plates with the suction of the boundary layer
or moving belts are used. Provided the belt is moving with
the speed of flow in the wind tunnel, the moving belt

Figure 48.23 Derivatives of the WIG Craft versus h for a Lippish Configura-
tion

effect, most of them increase in magnitude (see Figure

48.23). In contrast to aircraft, the derivatives of forces and
moments for WIG craft with respect to the vertical speed,
h& = dh/dt and pitch angle ϑ are different. The rotary de-
rivative of the pitching moment coefficient on ϑ& = dϑ/dt
Cmϑ& is influenced by the tail unit, making it only weakly
dependent on h. Figure 48.24 Two Methods for Simulation of the Ground in Wind Tunnels:
The compressibility of air plays a significant role when a) Using a Mirror Image (the upper picture) and b) Using a Rigid plate (lower
the Mach number is greater than 0.6. This limit is still not image)
 Chapter 48: Wing In Ground (WIG) Craft 48-11

method gives the most realistic results. However, this ∂Cm

method is costly, time consuming and complicated. It is, <0
∂ϑ
therefore, used rather rarely in practice. A few facilities pro-
where Cm is the pitching moment coefficient referred to
ducing oscillatory motion of models have been developed
the mean aerodynamic chord,
in Russia to obtain unsteady aerodynamic derivatives in
• Criterion of static stability with respect to the change of
wind tunnels. Unfortunately, this work has not been com-
relative height of flight :
pleted yet because of difficulties with proper measurement

冨
of small unsteady forces acting on the oscillatory wing. In dC ∂CL X∂ – Xh
L = <0 [1]
all other respects the technique of wind tunnel experiments dh Cm=0 ∂h X∂
for WIG craft is similar to that for conventional aircraft.
The aerodynamic centers of pitch Xϑ and height Xh, are
The tests with models and full-size trials are necessary
given by:
for:
∂Cm ∂CL
• checking the craft’s ability to achieve the cruising
regime for a given thrust,
X∂ =  
∂ϑ /
∂ϑ
[2]

∂Cm ∂CL
• adjusting the position of the center of gravity,
• adjusting the zero settings for deflection of control sur-
faces,
Xh =  
∂h / ∂h
Usually, for a common WIG, X∂<0 and ∂CL/∂h<0, so
[3]

• studying the response of WIG craft to actuation of con- the simplified criterion, Irodov criterion, Xh
X∂, can be
trol elements, wind gusts and wave perturbations, used for the stability analysis. Experience shows that pro-
• testing maneuverability characteristics, vided the Irodov criterion lies between 0.07 and 0.15 both
• testing and improvement the takeoff techniques. static and dynamic stability are ensured. The three most
The vortex wake of a WIG craft consists of a system of important factors influencing stability are: 1) the tail unit,
tip vortices shed from wing tips, tail unit, winglets and end 2) the form of wing sections, and 3) the main wing form.
plates. The strongest vortices are generated at the lower In contrast to conventional aircraft, the position of the
edge of the endplates whereas the other vortices decay center of gravity does not influence the static stability. Pro-
rather quickly behind the craft. The endplate vortices are a vided the variation of the wing form is restricted by differ-
potential hazard for closely following smaller craft. CFD ent construction and operational conditions, a large tail
simulations have shown that the trailing vortices behind a unit located rather far from the main wing can achieve the
WIG craft move in a corridor with a width not exceeding desirable stability. The tail unit also should be placed high
12 vortex generation heights plus the span of the WIG. enough above the main wing to avoid the negative influ-
ence of tip vortices shed from the main wing.
The presence of a large tail unit leads to an increase of
weight, and may make the WIG craft ineffective. The solu-
48.8 STABILITY OF THE FLIGHT tion to this problem was found by the invention of S-foils
The longitudinal stability of WIG craft is a very critical de- with a S-shaped camber line (Figures 48.20 and 48.25). The
sign factor. The scenario of most crashes in the last 30 stabilizing effect of the S-shaped profile is based on the in-
years with WIG craft is more or less the same: a sudden fluence of the venturi effect (Figure 48.19) which takes
loss of longitudinal stability, very often due to some un- place close to the trailing edge of a S-shaped profile. On the
known circumstances resulting in a sudden pitch-up mo- one hand the venturi effect reduces the lift, and on the other
tion of the craft causing the wings to stall. At increasing hand it has a positive effect on the static stability by shift-
speed, lift increases and results in increasing height over ing the aerodynamic center in height toward the bow.
the ground. The changing distribution of aerodynamic From the point of view of dynamics (mild response to
pressure can result in a so-called pitch-up tendency, as it is the disturbances) and serviceability (weak influence of the
known from high speed boats, which accidentally might speed of the motion and the height of flight on the pitch
flip over after reaching a certain speed and trim angle. angle), the most favorable position of the center of gravity
The theory of WIG stability was developed by Irodov is between the aerodynamic centers Xh and X∂, at the dis-
and Staufenbiel and it has been found that the following tance of about 0.1–0.3 (Xh
X∂) from Xh.
criteria play a decisive role in terms of static stability (3): Dynamic properties of the WIG can be estimated using
the linear theory of stability of small perturbations of a
• Criterion of the static stability with respect to pitching WIG from the reference state of steady rectilinear flight.
48-12 Ship Design & Construction, Volume 2

CL = CL0 + CϑL0(ϑ – ϑ0) + CL0

h (h – h )
0
ϑ h
+ C L0dϑ/dt + CL0dh/dt + CLper [7]
where subscripts 0 and per mean, respectively, the coeffi-
cient referred to the reference state, and additional force
caused by the flap and rudder deflections and waves influ-
ence.
Substituting equation 7 for all forces and moments into
equations 4 through 6 the system of linearized equations of
the longitudinal motion is obtained, which for the case of
variable forward speed, leads to the fifth-order characteris-
tic equation (the so-called quintic):
λ5 + A1λ4 + A2λ3 + A3λ2 + A4λ + A5 = 0 [8]
The necessary and sufficient stability conditions are as
follows (Equation 4 through 6) Ai>0, i=1,5; A1A2–A3>0,
(A1A2–A3) (A3A4–A2A5)2>0.
The analysis of the dynamic stability shows that the
Figure 48.25 Irodov Criterion versus h for a Lippish Configuration with the Irodov criterion has to be restricted from down and above.
Conventional (Clark Y) and the S-shaped (Clark-YH) Foils Due to strong ground effect, the perturbed longitudinal
motion of the WIG craft qualitatively differs from that of
One may use the common technique developed for con- the airplane. The WIG craft has three natural modes corre-
ventional airplanes (Gurvitz-Ruth analysis) taking into ac- sponding to five roots (λ1=n1, λ2=n2iσ2, (λ3=n3iσ3,
count peculiarities of the ground effect aerodynamics. In whereas on aircraft has only two ones (the first is degener-
general, the equation of the longitudinal WIG motion can ated) (Figure 48.26).
be written in the following form: Provided the real parts ni are negative, the craft is sta-
d2x ble. The first mode corresponding to the pure real root
m 2 = T cos(∂–ϕ0) – D cos Φ – L sin Θ [4] λ1 < 0 describes a periodic change of the WIG speed and
dt
variations of the pitch angle and height of flight caused
d2H by the speed change. Two other modes corresponding to
m = T sin(∂–ϕ0) – D sin Θ – L cos Φ – W [5] λ2 and λ3 are oscillatory and describe the long period
dt2
(phugoid) and the short period motions. The roots λ1 and
Jy = MZ – TzT [6] λ2 dominate the transitional processes when the motion of
WIG craft is perturbed in the ground effect. Typical loci of
where roots of the WIG craft Hydrowing VT01 are illustrated in
x = the longitudinal coordinate, Figure 48.27 depending on the height of flight.
m = the mass,
T = the thrust,
D = the drag,
Θ = the flight-path angle,
L = the lift,
H = the height of flight,
ϕ0 = the angle between the thrust vector and the base line
of the craft,
W = the weight,
zT = the arm of the thrust,
Jy = the longitudinal inertial moment, and
Mz I = the pitching moment.
Using the method of small perturbations we linearize
the forces and moments with respect to a reference state
(h0,ϑ0), so for the lift coefficient we have: Figure 48.26 Typical Roots Locus of Aircraft and WIG Craft.
 Chapter 48: Wing In Ground (WIG) Craft 48-13

Figure 48.28 The Lateral Self-stabilization of WIG Craft

Figure 48.27 Loci of Roots of the WIG Craft Hydrowing VT01

height of flight h, in turn, results in a drastic change of the
stability derivative mxγ.
The static course stability is determined by the inequal-
As seen from Figure 48.27 the root corresponding to ity myβ < 0. Simple conditions of oscillatory course and
the phugoid instability becomes positive (the craft be- rolling stability can be obtained for small h (4):
comes oscillatory unstable) when the height of flight
grows. At a large height h when the ground effect has dis- myωy /iy = ccβ/2 < 0, [9]
appeared n2 becomes negative again. The WIG craft be- mxγ – mxωx C L/(2µ) < 0. [10]
comes stable as a common airplane when the tail unit has
proper dimensions.
Another distinction from a conventional airplane both
48.9 CONTROL OF MOTION
oscillatory modes of a WIG in extreme ground effect have
AND MANEUVERABILITY
the same order of damping. When the motion of WIG craft
is perturbed due to, for instance, deflection of the height In spite of the fact that the WIG craft are naturally stable,
rudder, the transitional process of damping consists of two the opinion exists among engineers that a system of auto-
different phases. In the first phase, determined by roots λ2 matic control should be considered as necessary equip-
and λ3, the moments and normal forces are balanced at a ment for WIG craft to ensure safe high-speed operation
nearly constant speed of the forward motion. The speed is close to the free surface. A typical automatic control sys-
restored in the second phase called the aperiodic motion tem includes the following components:
and determined by the real root λ1.
• a system for measurement of motion parameters,
In the contrast to the airplane the WIG craft has natural
• a system for stabilization of the WIG craft at a given
lateral self-stabilization capability near the ground deter-
motion stage,
mined by the condition mxγ < 0, where mxγ is the derivative of
• a system for damping disturbances, and
the rolling moment coefficient mx on the roll angle γ. The
• a system for keeping the WIG at a given course and also
physical mechanism of self-stabilization is simple: when,
automation of maneuvers.
for example, the left wing tip approaches the ground, addi-
tional lift forces are generated on the left half of the wing, The control of motion is performed by using the fol-
whereas the right half experiences decreased lift, which lowing control elements (see Figure 48.29): airlerons 1
leads to the restoring moment mx < 0 (Figure 48.28). (control of the roll angle), flaps 2 (control of the height of
Depending on h, there is a strong coupling between the flight h), and height rudder on the tail unit 3 (control of the
longitudinal and the lateral motions of WIG craft. A pitch ϑ), direction rudder (control of the course). The
change of the drift angle β produces a change of the pitch- speed of the motion is regulated by change of the engine
ing moment Mz thereby affecting the longitudinal motion thrust. In contrast to airplanes, flaps control the height of
and causing perturbations of h and ϑ. The change of the flight, because the actuation of the height rudder can pro-
48-14 Ship Design & Construction, Volume 2

Figure 48.29 Control Elements of a WIG Craft

Figure 48.30 The Maximum Permissible Wind Gust versus the Period of Gust
duce undesirable change of pitch angle, which is rather Perturbations T. The Application of the Stabilization and Damping Automatic
dangerous in the vicinity of the ground. System (SD System) Results in Three and One-half Times Larger Permissible
The optimal way to increase the height of flight is si- Wind Gust than that without the SD System)
multaneous deflection of the flap and increase of the en-
gine thrust.
The simplest control procedure of the WIG longitudinal change the turn direction safely. This is only possible when
motion is described by the common P (proportional) and D making coordinated turns, where the bank attitude com-
(differential) law: pensates the centrifugal forces during turns. Thus the bank
dϑ attitude avoids the aerodynamic proper yaw motion.
δhr = Phrϑ + Dhr  [11]
dt A WIG craft can avoid collision with other objects using
either horizontal maneuver (a banked turning) or jumping
dh in the vertical plane. The horizontal maneuver is much safer
δf = Pf(h – hcr) + Df  [12]
dt than the vertical one due to risk of the pitch-up instability.
where, The turning radius is approximately a few hundreds meters
for small craft (300 m for the Hovering 2VT) and a few kilo-
δhr = the angles of deflections of height rudder,
meters for large machines. When turning, the WIG craft ex-
δf = the angle of deflections of flap,
periences an additional drag caused by the drift, roll angles
Phr, Pf = coefficients, and
and deflection of control elements. To overcome possible
hcr = the height of flight in cruise.
touchdown in a turning maneuver, a special strategy was
The presence of the automatic control systems essen- developed by the Alexeyev Bureau and independently by
tially enlarges the potential and safety of operation of WIG Airfoil Development. The automatic system holds the dis-
craft (Figure 48.30). Unfortunately, due to high costs, the tance between the tip end of the wing and the ground con-
application of automatic systems on small WIG craft is not stant. Before turning, the WIG craft, therefore, has to attain
common. a larger height of flight by increasing the thrust and then ac-
The highest risk perceived by the authorities is the risk tuating the ailerons (Figure 48.31).
of collision in mixed traffic with the slow conventional Figure 48.32 shows the comparison of turn radii of air-
ships, which are nearly static, compared to cruising WIGs. craft, WIG (airfoil) and Hovercraft. The latter represents
Therefore, it can be expected, that the authorities will issue the type of transport vehicles which cannot bank during
limitations for WIG operation, depending on the local sit- turns.
uation on the waterways on the one side, and on the ability Figure 48.33 shows an obstacle avoidance maneuver of
to avoid obstacles and maneuverability of the WIG craft on the WIG craft Hoverwing 2VT, where the GPS data indi-
the other side. The maneuverability is not only determined cate the flight track. Approaching at a speed of 125 km/h,
by the turn radii, but also more important by the ability to the obstacle avoidance maneuver only had to be started at
 Chapter 48: Wing In Ground (WIG) Craft 48-15

Figure 48.31 The Technique of Turning

Figure 48.33 A Typical Anti-collision Maneuver of the WIG Craft Hoverwing

2VT

Figure 48.32 The Turn Radii of Different Transport Vehicles

a distance of 170 m, in order to pass the obstacle at a dis-

Figure 48.34 Trajectory of the WIG Craft Hoverwing 2VT Illustrating Its High
tance of 50 m. Figure 48.34 shows the GPS track of a Hov-
Maneuverability
erwing 2VT flight, where several turns with less than
300 m radius were recorded.
Good obstacle recognition allows safe operation, even sible distance to avoid an obstacle of 1 meter height by
at high speed, as the safe operation of the Hovercraft in the jumping is three times less than that by turning.
English Channel proved over many years, even though An especially challenging problem related to the con-
those vessels need about five times larger turn radii as nor- trol of the motion is the measurement of WIG motion pa-
mal ships. rameters.
The jumping maneuver can be performed for avoidance The necessary accuracy of the height measurement is
of low obstacles a short distance ahead of the WIG craft. about 10 cm. It is an extremely difficult problem because h
For the WIG craft Hydrowing VT01 (1) the minimum pos- is small and variable due to wave perturbations.
48-16 Ship Design & Construction, Volume 2

Most of the research and practical design problems as- In displacement mode at low speed, maneuvering in
sociated with the WIG aerodynamics and hydrodynamics, harbor areas, tight river turns, etc., the power required is
including stability of the motion can be solved by simula- small. It is usually provided by water propellers driven by
tion with commercial software, such as Autowing (4). electric or hydraulic auxiliary motors capable of attaining
a minimum speed of approximately 8 knots. The resulting
noise emission, therefore, is similar to that of conventional
48.10 SEAWORTHINESS low-speed boats in this mode.
In taxiing mode, which is used only in unoccupied
The wave influence has a dramatic effect on the ability of
areas where noise emission is not harmful for the environ-
WIG craft to take off. Additional resistance caused by
ment, the propulsion is by the main propellers at approxi-
waves plays a significant role in the choice of an engine.
mately 70% power setting.
Thus, the seaworthiness of WIG craft is determined by the
For takeoff the maximum installed power is used for 60
takeoff regime. As mentioned, the main limitation of WIG
to 90 seconds, so that in this mode the highest noise level
craft by sea state is its size, similar to conventional ships.
is reached. In flare mode during cruise, the power setting is
The design of a WIG, therefore, should be adequate for the
reduced to 40 to 70%, depending on cruise height and
intended area of operation, wherein the size of the craft
speed, resulting in a corresponding lower noise emission.
should be selected such that for 80% of the operational
Measurements during the operation of Airfish and Hov-
time the sea state does not exceed 10% of the craft’s
erwing type WIGs recorded noise levels of 65dBA during
wingspan.
close fly-by.
The power to be installed is determined by the required
The power requirement of WIG craft is significantly
takeoff power at a wave height of 5 to 7% of the wingspan.
lower than that of comparable aircraft, especially since the
Thus, the installed power is also sufficient to overcome the
speed range of WIGs does not require the use of jet en-
drag in cruise heights of 20 to 30% of the wingspan. But
gines, again producing less noise.
this ability should be considered a technical feature only,
To reduce the engine noise, the engine can be encapsu-
and not a practical application, as the economic advantages
lated as in automotive designs, where solutions for the
of ground effect operation decrease with increasing cruise
avoidance of vibrations and acoustic decoupling of struc-
heights.
tural components are also available.
The water loads onto the structure give further limita-
The noise level can be further kept low by using pro-
tions, because the structures must withstand the sea states
peller blade tip speeds below 200 m/s. Shrouding of pro-
over which the craft is certified to cruise, in case of an
pellers would be an additional method to reduce noise.
emergency landing.
On future larger craft the use of gas turbines can be ex-
Finally, the limitation by aerodynamic design has to be
pected, as those offer a better power-to-weight ratio than
mentioned in regard to sea state. While the FF/AFD de-
reciprocating engines. Gas turbine engines would in most
signs Airfish and Hoverwing are inherently longitudinal
cases be mounted on pylons downstream of the passenger
and height stable in waves up to 30% of their wing span,
cabin area.
there are available designs such as tandem craft, which
In this case propulsion, as a source of noise, is located
offer the required stability only in close ground effect. In
downstream of the passenger cabin.
these designs, as an increase of operational height raises
In contrast to the Hovercraft, where a closed air cush-
the risk of a pitch up, the maximum safe cruise height is a
ion has to be maintained and every incoming wave in-
limitation caused by sea state.
creases the pressure with remarkably high frequency, WIG
Investigations (1) have shown that during cruise, wind
craft do not have this source of noise and vibration as the
gust limitation is more important than limitations due to
dynamic air cushion is not contained and pressure oscilla-
the influence of waves on the flight of WIG craft in rough
tions are hence not pronounced.
sea conditions in which the height of flight is great enough
to avoid water touchdown.

48.12 STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND MATERIALS

48.11 NOISE AND VIBRATION
The structural design of WIG craft should be based on re-
Noise emission comes from three sources, which result in alistic load assumptions for the different operational
different frequencies and intensities, depending on the modes together with strength requirements specified in
mode of operation. terms of limit loads. Direct calculations and substantiating
 Chapter 48: Wing In Ground (WIG) Craft 48-17

load tests should be performed to verify scantlings. Load loys, which are relatively soft, are well suited for more in-
assumptions can be taken from High Speed Craft Rules or tricate shapes produced by extrusion processes. By subse-
British Hovercraft Safety Requirements for hydrodynamic quent heat treatment it is also possible to improve the
loads or from FAR 25 for aerodynamic loads. Some clas- strength properties of AlMgSi alloys. When using high-
sification societies are developing guidelines for the clas- strength Al alloys in welded structures, the strength prop-
sification and construction of WIG. erties in the heat-affected zone are somewhat reduced.
Pressure measurements on the bottom structure of two Aluminum alloy AW-7075 has a good resistance to
different two-seater WIG craft have shown that slamming crack corrosion combined with very high strength proper-
loads during takeoff and landing are the design load cases ties and is, therefore, a popular choice for riveted con-
(5). Figure 48.35 illustrates a representative pattern for the struction of airfoil frames. It is not weldable and the cor-
bottom pressure at the step for a takeoff/flare/landing rosion resistance in marine environment is poor. Although
cycle. it is an interesting construction material for WIG craft, cor-
The lower sides of the wings have also to be designed rosion aspects would require particular attention.
to withstand slamming loads. Due to the presence of an air For smaller WIG craft and series production craft, fiber
cushion these loads are smaller than the loads of the wet- reinforced plastics (FRP) is an appropriate material. There
deck area of an HSC catamaran. The upper surfaces are is a wide variety of different FRP materials (see Chapter
subject to aerodynamic loads only. 21—Composites). The reinforcement material generally is
The wing’s trailing edge should be firm against aerody- glass, carbon or aramide fibers, which are available in the
namic loads while some flexibility against hydrodynamic form of rovings, mats, fabrics and non-woven fabrics and
impact loads helps reduce stress concentrations. This can combinations of these. Carbon and aramide fibers have
be achieved by suitably designed flaps with spring-damper very high tensile strength values; aramide fibers are used to
systems. increase impact resistance. The laminating resins used are
The choice of construction material is dictated by polyester, vinylester and epoxy resins. Core materials
weight considerations. Present designs adapt aviation available for sandwich laminates are generally PVC
practices with suitable modifications to allow for the cor- foams, polyurethane (PUR) foams, polymethacryl (PMI)
rosive operating environment. While this imposes addi- foams, balsa wood and honeycombs.
tional constraints, manufacturing processes and testing The advantage offered by these materials is the possi-
procedures do not necessarily have to meet the rigorous bility to design stiff, high strength light-weight structures
aviation standards. which, depending on the fiber orientation, display the de-
Several WIG craft, especial larger ones, were built sired strength properties ranging from a unidirectional to a
using aluminum (Al) alloys. In shipbuilding, aluminum al- quasi-isotropic behavior.
loys of the 5000 series (AlMg alloys) and the 6000 series Metallic fittings in FRP constructions require particular
(AlMgSi alloys) are common. Good weldability and ex- attention, as these are prone to corrode when in contact
cellent corrosion resistance in the marine environment with seawater. This is particularly true for the combination
characterize both alloys. Al-magnesium alloys are prima- of aluminum fittings and carbon fibers where the alu-
rily employed for plates whereas Al-magnesium-silicon al- minum parts can disintegrate rapidly with consequential
loss of structural integrity. A way around this problem is
proper isolation of metal fittings with resign or a glass
fiber/resign matrix.

48.13 REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

The industry developing and building WIG craft is still
young and operational experience is very limited. How-
ever, as shown on the previous pages, the design and con-
struction of small WIG craft has now reached a degree of
maturity where a reliable regulatory framework in which
to build and operate these craft is needed. This issue is cur-
rently being addressed at both international and national
Figure 48.35 Time Record of Bottom Slamming Pressure at Step level.
48-18 Ship Design & Construction, Volume 2

Internationally, the International Maritime Organiza- The approach draws on techniques established outside
tion, IMO, started deliberations on requirements for WIG the marine industry, in particular the offshore industry’s
craft at DE 38 in 1995 (6) and has finalized a set of draft safety case regime and the aerospace industry’s safety as-
guidelines at DE 45 in 2002 (7). At a national level, vari- sessment procedures (8), and adapts the scope and the
ous administrations have issued guidance documents for process itself to the requirements of WIG craft.
designers and operators. Both share the same philosophy The following paragraphs describe the approach in
by seeking to ensure safety through a combination of de- more detail.
terministic rules and a forward-looking probabilistic ap- The safety assessment is conducted in parallel with the
proach. This is supplemented by safety management mea- design and construction of the craft. Accordingly, three
sures covering the operational life of a craft. phases may be distinguished:
Deterministic rules relate mainly to aspects such as Generation of requirements: Depending on the critical-
structural integrity, stability, life saving appliances, etc. ity of functional failures at craft and system level, safety
The probabilistic approach in the form of a systematic objectives are assigned to the various failure conditions
safety assessment focuses on system design and integrity. identified. These safety objectives are expressed as proba-
For safety provisions emanating from the deterministic bility levels and probability budgets that must be met by
approach the reader is referred to reference 7. The present the implemented system. Specific hardware and software
section focuses on the safety assessment process, as this requirements are derived that feed into the specification for
constitutes a new instrument in the marine industry afford- the procurement phase.
ing a high degree of flexibility to the designer while at the Design implementation: During procurement and im-
same time maintaining an acceptable level of risk (see plementation account must be taken of the failure rate
Chapter 8—Regulatory and Classification Requirements budgets assigned to hardware and software items.
and Chapter 16—Safety). Verification: In the verification phase it should be
demonstrated that the hardware and software actually im-
48.13.1 Safety Assessment Process plemented satisfy the relevant safety requirements.
Different processes are employed in the phases of the
The objective of the assessment process is to evaluate the
development cycle, as illustrated in Figure 48.36:
craft functions and the design of systems performing these
functions. It is important to note that the focus is on sys- • Functional Hazard Assessment (FHA),
tems and not on other safety-related issues such as struc- • Preliminary System Safety Assessment (PSSA), and
tural design, load assumptions, or stability in the different • System Safety Assessment (SSA).
operational modes. The safety assessment process should
ensure that all relevant system failure conditions are iden- There is likely to be some overlap between the phases
tified and that all significant combinations of failures, and the assessment process is iterative in nature. Individual
which could cause those failures conditions, are taken into activities will hence be revisited as the design evolves and
account. becomes more defined.

Assessment Functional Hazard Preliminary System System Safety

Process: Assessment (FHA) Safety Assessment Assessment (SSA)
Design Implementation

(PSSA)

Purpose of – Identify and classify – Establish system and – Verify that safety
Process: failure conditions item safety requirements requirements defined
– Establish safety – Develop specifications in FHA and PSSA
objectives for hardware are satisfied
procurement

Development Concept Development Preliminary Detailed Procurement Design Validation

Cycle: Design Design

Figure 48.36 Safety Assessment Process

 Chapter 48: Wing In Ground (WIG) Craft 48-19

The Functional Hazard Assessment (FHA) is con- 48.13.2 Safety Assessment Methods
ducted at the beginning of the development cycle. It should While the previous subsection outlined the overall process,
clearly identify and classify failure conditions associated the following paragraphs briefly describe the methods to
with the craft’s functions. These failure condition classifi- be employed in the different development phases.
cations establish the safety objectives. The output of the
FHA forms the starting point for the Preliminary System
48.13.2.1 Functional hazard assessment
Safety Assessment (PSSA).
The Functional Hazard Assessment (FHA) is essentially a
While the FHA is a purely functional type of analysis,
qualitative analysis. It relies on the analyst’s experience
the Preliminary System Safety Assessment (PSSA) is a
and understanding of the system under consideration and
systematic analysis of the proposed system architecture.
its operating environment. There are no simulation or
Its purpose is to show how failures at a lower hierarchical
modeling techniques, to ensure that all hazards are actually
level can lead to the functional hazards identified in the
identified. However, dedicated worksheets in tabular
FHA. The PSSA shall provide the designer with all neces-
form facilitate the process and aid the analyst in a system-
sary safety requirements of the system and demonstrate
atic approach. A sample worksheet is reproduced in Figure
that the proposed architecture can meet the safety objec-
48.37.
tives identified by the FHA.
Starting point for the assessment is a list of functions
The PSSA is an iterative process and conducted at dif-
(internal and external) associated with the various systems
ferent development stages. At the lowest level, the PSSA
envisaged for the craft. Using the FHA worksheet, failure
determines the safety-related design requirements of hard-
conditions are then applied to each of the functions and ex-
ware and software. The PSSA usually takes the form of a
amined with respect to their effect on both the system and
Fault Tree Analysis. It should also address safety issues
the craft itself, and on their severity. Depending on the out-
arising from Common Cause considerations.
come of the assessment, permissible probability budgets—
The System Safety Assessment is the final step in the as-
so-called objectives—are assigned to each failure condi-
sessment process. It integrates results of the previously
tion. These objectives should take the form of written
performed FHA and PSSA. While FHA and PSSA are
requirements in specifications (craft requirements, system
used during the design process to derive safety require-
requirements, and item requirements). Failure conditions
ments, an SSA is a verification tool to show that the im-
to be considered should include:
plemented design satisfies the requirements established by
the FHA and PSSA. • complete loss of function (detected/undetected),
The results of the SSA should be documented to ensure • malfunction (detected/undetected),
traceability of the verification steps. The documentation • incorrect function,
should include those activities (regular checks by the crew, • reduced performance,
maintenance tasks, inspections) necessary to satisfy the • interrupted function, and
safety requirements established by the PSSA. • inadvertent function.

Functional Hazard Analysis Sheet: System x Sheet: of

Issue:
Date:

System: Function:
Subsystems:

Item Failure Condition Mission Phase Failure Effects Classification Objectives Remarks
No:

Figure 48.37 FHA Worksheet

48-20 Ship Design & Construction, Volume 2

Failure conditions identified in a qualitative manner as • published failure rate data, for example reference 9,
unacceptable need to be examined in more detail in the • published data on failure mode distributions, for exam-
Preliminary System Safety Assessment (PSSA). The PSSA ple reference 10,
process employs a number of analysis techniques that are • industry sources, and
briefly described in the following paragraphs under the • computational methods.
headings:
48.13.2.4 Zonal hazard analysis (ZHA)
• Fault Tree Analysis (FTA),
Whereas FTA and FMECA examine the system architec-
• Failure Modes Effects and Criticality Analysis
ture in a generic sense without looking at the actual instal-
(FMECA), and
lation of systems in the craft and in relation to each other,
• Zonal Hazard Analysis (ZHA).
the Zonal Hazard Analysis does precisely that, that is, ex-
amining the physical arrangement of systems and identify-
48.13.2.2 Fault tree analysis (FTA) ing potential hazards resulting from the way systems and
Fault Tree Analysis is employed in the PSSA process to de- components are installed in relation to other hazardous
termine the causes leading to undesirable top events iden- systems or elements.
tified in the FHA. It is a graphical representation of events, The starting point for a ZHA is the definition of specific
or more often combinations of events, that contribute to the zones within the craft that are, for example, separated by
top event. Principles and procedures for Fault Tree Analy- bulkheads or other parts of the structure. The analysis is
sis are not discussed in this section as they are well docu- performed initially based on design drawings and later on
mented in the literature, for example in ARP 4761 (8). mock-ups or the final craft. For each of the zones four as-
From the FHA the permissible failure rate for the top pects are addressed in the analysis:
event is known, for example, 10E-7 for a hazardous failure Compliance with installation rules: Compliance with
condition. This information allows the designer to allocate the relevant rules and requirements relating to equipment
failure rate budgets to intermediate level events and to installation must be demonstrated.
basic events. There is room for optimization, also from a Interaction between systems: The analysis should iden-
cost perspective, by concentrating resources on hardware tify intrinsically hazardous items (fuel lines) and show that
associated with events with the highest potential for reduc- failures (fuel leakage) do not cause cascade-type failures
ing the top event probability. For complex fault trees, com- in neighboring systems.
mercial software packages offer features, such as impor- Maintenance errors: Improper equipment installation
tance analysis, that help identify and rank these events. may increase the likelihood of maintenance errors. The
When the fault tree shows that the target probability for analysis should identify such areas and recommend alter-
the top event can be met, the failure rate data for the basic native designs.
events are included in the specifications developed in the Environmental effects: Consideration should be given
procurement phase (compare with Figure 48.36). to the effect of such as lightning strike, bird strike, water
ingress, and other environmental conditions.
48.13.2.3 Failure modes effects and criticality Results of the analysis are recorded in data sheets, as
analysis (FMECA) shown in the example in Figure 48.38
An FMECA should be performed for items that have been
identified as contributing to unacceptable hazards in the
previously developed fault tree. As with the FHA, the 48.13.3 Safety Management for Craft Operation
process is facilitated by worksheets in tabular form. Its Safe operation of WIG craft cannot be achieved by engi-
main purpose is to provide the quantitative failure rate data neering methods alone. It is equally important to have a
for each failure mode that appears as a basic event in the system in place that ensures continuous availability and
fault tree. performance of safety functions throughout the service life
An important and difficult aspect of an FMECA is con- of the craft. In the marine industry the appropriate mecha-
cerned with obtaining reliable data for failure mode rates nisms are provided by the ISM-Code as incorporated in
under similar environmental and operational conditions to SOLAS Chapter IX. The operator is thereby required to
those envisaged for the system being analyzed. The de- implement a certified Safety Management System (SMS)
signer may draw on various sources, such as: that addresses the following elements:
 Chapter 48: Wing In Ground (WIG) Craft 48-21

ZHA: HAZARD IDENTIFICATION DATA SHEET

System: System: Sheet:

Zone: Subsytem: Issue:
Zone no: Equipment: Date:

# Hazardous Hazardous Initiator Effects Severity Safety Measures/

Element Condition Event Class Means of Compliance

Figure 48.38 ZHA Data Sheet

• safety and environmental policy, taken that requirements resulting from the assessment can
• company responsibilities and authorities, feed into the evolving design.
• appointment of Designated Person(s),
• master’s responsibility and authority,
• resources, including personnel,
48.14 WIG CHARACTERISTICS
• development of plans for onboard operations,
• emergency preparedness, The characteristics of typical examples of WIGs are shown
• reporting and analysis of non-conformances, accidents, in Table 48.II.
hazardous occurrences and near misses,
• preventive maintenance for craft and equipment,
• documentation,
• company safety verification, review and evaluation, 48.15 REFERENCES
• third-party certification, verification and control. 1. Benedikt, K., Kornev, N. V., Meyer, M., Ebert, J., “Complex
Mathematical Model of the WIG Motion Including the
Most of these elements are directly linked to the safety Takeoff Mode,” Journal of Ocean Engineering, 29(3): 315–
assessment process. In particular, the output from the 357, 2001
PSSA and SSA provides valuable input for defining: 2. Maskalik, A. I., Rozhdestvensky, K. V., Synitsin, D. N., “A
View of the Present State of Research in Aero- and Hydro-
• onboard operations, dynamics of Ekranoplans,” RTO AVT Symposium on Fluid
• functional checks at specified intervals, Dynamics Problems of Vehicles Operating near or in the
Air-Sea Interface, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 5-8 Octo-
• maintenance procedures, including details about appro-
ber 1998: 25-1 to 25-9
priate inspection intervals and methods,
3. van Opstal, E. P. E., “The WIG Page,” http://www.
• emergency procedures and actions, se-technology.com/wig/
• procedures related to non-conformances, accidents and 4. Zhukov, V. I., Peculiarities of the WIG’s Aerodynamics, Dy-
hazardous situations, and namics and Stability, TSAGI Press, 1997
• document control procedures relating to the SMS and 5. Fach, K., Petersen, U., Reischauer, H. J., “Classification Ex-
the craft integrity. perience with an 8-Seater WIG Craft,” FAST ’99, Seattle,
1999
A system safety assessment as described in this section 6. International Maritime Organization, Sub-Committee on
constitutes a departure from traditional regulatory practice Ship Design and Equipment 38th session, Report to the
in the marine industry. The effort for the analysis is con- Maritime Safety Committee, DE38/29, 1995
siderable and involves experts with a range of backgrounds 7. International Maritime Organization, Draft MSC Circular
such as system design, operation, and assessment method- “Interim Guidelines for Wing-In-Ground (WIG) Craft,” DE
ology. Timing of the analysis is critical and care must be 45/27/Add. 1, 2002
48-22 Ship Design & Construction, Volume 2

TABLE 48.II WIG Craft Typical Characteristics

Length Span Power or Displacement Speed Number of Permissible

WIG craft (m) (m) thrust (kg) (knots) people wave height

Airfish – 3 9.9 7.5 55 kW 760 73 2 0.3

Airfish – 8 17.2 15.2 345 kW 4300 86 8 0.5
Hoverwing – 2VT 10.6 10.6 78 kW 1150 67 2 0.5
KM 98.0 38.0 8×9.5 tonne 500 000 297 — 3.5
(PAR)+2×10.5
tonne (cruise)
Orlyonok 58.0 31.5 2×10.5 tonne 140 000 216 150 1.5
(PAR)+15.0
tonne (cruise)
Lun 73.8 44.0 8×13.5 ton 400 000 297 — 2.5
Volga 2 11.6 7.6 220 kW 2700 65 8 0.5
Strizh 11.4 6.6 235 kW 1630 108 2 0.5
TAF VIII-5 19.8 8.5 1.200 kW 9200 95 15 —
XTW-2 18.5 12.7 440 kW 4000 81 12 0.5
Aquaglide 10.5 5.9 162 kW 2100 81 4 0.3
Hydrowing VT01 9.9 7.8 88 kW 1050 65 2 0.4

8. Society of Automotive Engineers, Aerospace Recom- 9. Reliability Analysis Center, Non-electronic Parts Reliability
mended Practice 4761, Guidelines and Methods for Con- Data, 1997
ducting the Safety Assessment Process on Civil Airborne 10. Reliability Analysis Center, Failure Mode/ Mechanism Dis-
Systems and Equipment, 1996 tributions, 1997