Analysis of Defence Line Weaving for Safety Guidance Strips and Land Aircraft Safety and Communication

Dodik Widarbowo; Fajar Gumelar; Maltus Jackline Kapistrano; Wahyu Wibisono; Antoni Arif Priadi

doi:10.59261/jequi.v8i2.327

Authors

Dodik Widarbowo Politeknik Pelayaran Sorong
Fajar Gumelar Politeknik Pelayaran Sorong
Maltus Jackline Kapistrano Direktorat Jenderal Perhubungan Laut
Wahyu Wibisono Politeknik Pelayaran Sulawesi Utara
Antoni Arif Priadi Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Pelayaran Jakarta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59261/jequi.v8i2.327

Keywords:

Wing-in-Ground Craft (WIG), Navigation Equipment, Maritime Communication Systems, Maritime Safety

Abstract

Background: Wing-in-Ground-effect (WIG) craft generate lift by operating at the air–water interface, enabling a unique mode of very high-speed maritime transport that is particularly suited to the highly complex nature of coastal and archipelagic regions. However, their distinctive operating characteristics high speed and low altitude present significant safety issues that require advanced navigation and communication systems.

Objective: This paper investigates navigation and communication systems associated with the safety of WIG craft under relevant international maritime rules (International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea SOLAS; IMO Guidelines for Wing-in-Ground Craft (MSC.1/Circ.1592).

Methods: A qualitative regulatory analysis and R&D methodology is used to analyze the alignment of international standards with WIG operational requirements, as well as to examine barriers to the implementation of domestic maritime systems.

Results: In the marine context, this study identifies major navigational technologies such as GNSS, radar, AIS, and integrated bridge systems for navigational awareness and collision avoidance. The integration of GMDSS communications and satellite-based technologies is indispensable for enabling coherent coordination and emergency response operations. SOLAS provisions do not fully satisfy all WIG operational requirements, while the application of IMO guidelines may result in disparate standards across jurisdictions.

Conclusion: A harmonized and risk-based navigation and communication safety framework is proposed, integrating SOLAS provisions and IMO WIG Guidelines to address identified regulatory gaps. The framework aims to promote regulatory consistency and support the safe integration of WIG craft into national and international maritime transport systems.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Baldauf, M., Schröder-Hinrichs, J. U., Kataria, A., Benedict, K., & Tuschling, G. (2016). Multidimensional Simulation In Team Training For Safety And Security In Maritime Transportation. Journal Of Transportation Safety & Security, 8(3), 197–213.

Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1984). Educational Research: An Introduction. British Journal Of Educational Studies, 32(3).

Chauvin, C., Lardjane, S., Morel, G., Clostermann, J. P., & Langard, B. (2013). Human And Organisational Factors In Maritime Accidents: Analysis Of Collisions At Sea Using The Hfacs. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 59, 26–37.

Costagliola, M. A. (2026). Emissions Regulations For Maritime Transportation. In Marine Propulsion For Decarbonization (Pp. 39–58). Elsevier.

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, And Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage Publications.

Cullinane, K., & Bergqvist, R. (2014). Emission Control Areas And Their Impact On Maritime Transport. In Transportation Research Part D: Transport And Environment (Vol. 28, Pp. 1–5). Elsevier.

Goerlandt, F. (2024). Risk Analysis For Vessel Accident Prevention In Marine Areas: An Accident-Theoretic Perspective On Spatial Aspects Of Risk. In Area-Based Management Of Shipping: Canadian And Comparative Perspectives (Pp. 159–183). Springer.

Goerlandt, F., & Montewka, J. (2015). Maritime Transportation Risk Analysis: Review And Analysis In Light Of Some Foundational Issues. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 138, 115–134.

Grammenos, C. T. (2026). The Handbook Of Maritime Economics And Business. Taylor & Francis.

Grech, M., Horberry, T., & Koester, T. (2019). Human Factors In The Maritime Domain. CRC Press.

Hetherington, C., Flin, R., & Mearns, K. (2006). Safety In Shipping: The Human Element. Journal Of Safety Research, 37(4), 401–411.

Irawan, H., Sundawa, D., Mustofa, I., Wijayanti, T., & Istianah, A. (2026). Mapping The Intellectual Landscape Of Character Education Research: A Systematic Literature Review Of Trends, Themes, And Collaboration Networks. Jurnal Kependidikan: Jurnal Hasil Penelitian Dan Kajian Kepustakaan Di Bidang Pendidikan, Pengajaran, Dan Pembelajaran, 12(1), 284–298.

Kerem, K., Carjova, K., & Tapaninen, U. P. (2025). Success Factors In Commercialization Of Wing-In-Ground Crafts As Means Of Maritime Transport: A Case Study. Future Transportation, 5(1), 13.

Liu, P., Khan, R. U., Afzaal, M., Asad, M., Du, X., & Yang, Z. (2026). Studying The Impact Of Contextual Factors On Language Barriers In Maritime Safety: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach. Maritime Policy & Management, 1–35.

Marzuki, P. M. (2017). Penelitian Hukum, Cet. 13. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group.

Misztal, L., & Hatlas-Sowinska, P. (2025). The Impact Of The Human Factor On Communication During A Collision Situation In Maritime Navigation. Applied Sciences, 15(5), 2797.

Montewka, J., Goerlandt, F., & Kujala, P. (2014). On A Systematic Perspective On Risk For Formal Safety Assessment (FSA). Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 127, 77–85.

Njeri Mugwe, J., & Runo, S. (2026). Mixed Methods Research Designs. In Research Methodology In Agricultural Sciences (Pp. 353–374). Springer.

Octavia, A. V. Z., Rahmawati, M., & Hermanto, F. (2026). Maintaining Maritime Safety Through The Use Of Navigational Equipment In Accordance With Solas Chapter V. International Journal Of Science And Environment, 6(2), 541–551.

Organization, I. M. (2020). Solas: Consolidated Edition 2020. Imo Publishing Group.

Park, J. Y., Choi, H., Lee, J., Choi, H., Woo, J., Kim, S., Kim, D. J., Kim, S. Y., & Kim, N. (2019). An Experimental Study On Vertical Motion Control Of A High-Speed Planing Vessel Using A Controllable Interceptor In Waves. Ocean Engineering, 173, 841–850.

Praetorius, G., & Hollnagel, E. (2014). Control And Resilience Within The Maritime Traffic Management Domain. Journal Of Cognitive Engineering And Decision Making, 8(4), 303–317.

Rośkowicz, M., Chachurski, R., Omen, Ł., & Jędrak, M. (2025). Analysis Of Wing In Ground-Craft Water Landing. Advances In Science And Technology. Research Journal, 19(3).

Rozhdestvensky, K. V. (2006). Wing-In-Ground Effect Vehicles. Progress In Aerospace Sciences, 42(3), 211–283. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.Paerosci.2006.10.001

Stopford, M. (2008). Maritime Economics 3E. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203891742

Tyron, O., Kaminska, S., & Didenko, M. (2026). Methods Of Researching The Human Factor In The Maritime Industry. Водний Транспорт, (45), 149–156.

Utne, I. B., Rokseth, B., Sørensen, A. J., & Vinnem, J. E. (2020). Towards Supervisory Risk Control Of Autonomous Ships. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 196, 106757.

Utne, I. B., Sørensen, A. J., & Schjølberg, I. (2017). Risk Management Of Autonomous Marine Systems And Operations. International Conference On Offshore Mechanics And Arctic Engineering, 57663, V03bt02a020.

Weintrit, A., & Neumann, T. (2015). Safety Of Marine Transport: Marine Navigation And Safety Of Sea Transportation. CRC Press.

Yun, L., Bliault, A., & Doo, J. (2010). Wig Craft And Ekranoplan. Ground Effect Craft Technology, 2.