Nuclear Engineering and Design 110 (1988) 207-211 207

North-Holland, Amsterdam

P R O B A B I L I T Y A N A L Y S I S O F AN A I R C R A F T C R A S H T O A N U C L E A R P O W E R P L A N T

Toshio K O B A Y A S H I
Kafima Institute o/Construction Technology, 19-1 Tobitakyu 2-Chone Chofu-Shi, Tokyo 182, Japan

Received 30 June 1988

Formulae to evaluate the probabifity of an aircraft crash onto a nuclear power plant are discussed. Four formulae
introduced in the references are reviewed. They are used to evaluate the probability of an aircraft crash for four flying
patterns, namely, "Landing on and/or taking off the airport", "Near airport", "Straight flight path" and "Racetrack pattern
flight", respectively. The formula to evaluate the crash probability for a "Free flight zone" is newly proposed by the author.
All formulae are accompanied by numerical examples adequately idealized to flying conditions.

I. Introduction This paper describes the state of the art on the

In the safety design of a nuclear power plant against
aircraft crash, the concept as below is usually adopted.
First, the crash probability to the plant is evaluated.
If the probability is smaller than the allowable value,
then the aircraft crash is neglected as design basis item,
otherwise adequate measures are taken to reduce the
influences of the released radioactive materials under
the allowable values.
Fig. 1 shows the flow chart of risk analysis of a
nuclear power plant for the crash of an aircraft.
methodology of the above chart regarding: "Evaluate
the probability of an aircraft crash onto the plant ".
2. The formula of crash probability for each flying
pattern
2.1. Landing on and~or taking off the airport
John M. Vallance [1] Proposed the next formula, eq.
(1), to evaluate the probability of a crash within an area

investigation of accidents
i
investigation of flying pattern I
Istatistical data of accidentsI around the plant
I
Icrash mechanisml

I
I
llevaluation of probability of aircraft crash to the plantll
I
Ievaluation of damage of structure,internals and pipings I
I
Ievaluation of the amount of released radioactive materials I
I
evaluation of influence on environment I
Fig. 1. Flow chart of risk analysis for aircraft crash.

0 0 2 9 - 5 4 9 3 / 8 8 / $ 0 3 . 5 0 © Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.

( N o r t h - H o l l a n d Physics P u b l i s h i n g Division)
208 l: Kobayashi / Probability analysis of aircraft crash

Plant

PLIOtT

Fig. 3. Relation between airport and plant.

uilYay

2.2. Near airport (beyond 5 miles)

Niyogi et al. [2] proposed the next formula, eq. (2),

Fig. 2. Relation between runway and plant. to evaluate the accident rate associated with airports
beyond 5 miles under the assumption that the flight
pattern from a n d / o r to the airport is axisymmetric to
the airport.
of 5 miles from the airport as shown in fig. 2, consider-
ing airplanes taking off a n d / o r landing on the airport. P = PI" N~. A/2~rR. (2)

P = P t . N y . A .D, (1) Example

Using the reference values for each parameter, the
where result is obtained for the plant shown in fig. 3 as

D = 0.22R. e_R/2 • e -a/s° for taking off, and P = 2.0 × 10-Tcrash/year.

D = ~ -0.31 . e_R/2. 5 . e_0/43 for landing. 2.3. Straight flight path

Example Kenneth A. Solomon [3] evaluated the crash prob-

In case of O = 45 °, the crash probabilities are ob- ability of the plant with a distance x from the flight
tained as follows: path using the formula:

taking off: P = 7.2 × 10 - s crash/year, P = P I . N c . A .F, (3)

landing: P = 2.8 × 10- v crash/year. F = ( g / 2 ) . e -gx. (4)

/
Fig. 4. Crash site distribution function for straight flight path.
 T Kobayashi / Probability analysis of aircraft crash 209

F is the crash site distribution function as shown in

fig. 4 and the decay constant (g) for each flight pattern
and aircraft classification is proposed as follows:
g = 1 mile-1 (military aircraft),
= 2 mile -1 (US general aviation other than aerial
HOIt~"Y"~" afte:tH:~nY±)k
application),
= 1 mile-1 (US general aviation aerial application
only),
= 1.6 mile-1 (US air carrier).
Example
In case of g = 1 and x = 5 miles, crash probability is
obtained as

P = 2 . 1 X 10 -8 crash/year.
Fig. 5. Crash site distribution function for racetrack pattern
flight.
2.4. Racetrack pattern flight

K. Hornyik et al. [4] estimated the probability of

crashes onto the plant site by a military aircraft on a
racetrack pattern flight.
They proposed the formula:
e = Ph" N," A" fPs dt,
where Ps is the crash site distribution function proposed
as eq. (6) and fig. 5 in a polar coordinate system
attached to the aircraft and its heading.
The line integral in eq. (5) has to be extended over
the racetrack pattern flight path.
Example
(5) For the racetrack pattern flight path given by fig. 6,
the crash probability is obtained as
P = 1.2 X 10-12 crash/year.

6 .(1__~0).(1 - I~__....]l) 2.5. Free flight

p, = Do2F , (6)
The author proposes a method to evaluate the prob-
where ability of a crash onto a plant located near the free
Do=Cd'Ho, flight zone. Assuming that the flight density in the zone
is uniform and the flying direction is also uniform, the
r=Q-Ho. crash site distribution function from the incapacitation

Sea

Point--Height

(ft)

A -- 300

C -- 7000
B -- 2000

D -- 7000
E -- 3000
Racetrack

Fig. 6. Relation between racetrack and plant.

210 T. Kobayashi / Probability analysis of aircraft crash

Free F l i g h t Zone ,
Free Flight Zone
[ !~ Sea
Plan :
i0 mile x i0 mile

Height :
from 2000 ft

to 20000 ft

Fig. 7. Relation between free flight zone and plant.

point (x, y, z) to the plant site (x o, Y0, z0 = 0) can be If several independent flying patterns must be con-
idealized as follows: sidered for one plant, the crash probability by each
flying pattern must be assumed up.
• . e-dk/z, In order to further improve the accuracy of the crash
Ps = ~ (7)
probability, it is important to obtain and refine the
statistical data and accident mechanisms of the crash
with
for the objective plant site.
d = ((x - x0) 2 + (y -y0) 2 .

Integrating this distribution function over the whole Acknowledgement

zone, crash probability to the plant can be obtained,
The author wishes to express appreciation to Dr. K.
P = e h . f . A , c , . f p ~ dV, (8) Muto for providing the chance to meet the experts in
the field of the aircraft crash probability and also for
where Ct is annual hours. his valuable advices. The author also wishes to thank
Dr. K.A. Solomon, Dr. L. Siitterlin and Dr. N.F. Zorn
Example for their useful comments and suggestions, and fruitful
For the free flight zone given by fig. 7, crash prob- discussions.
ability is obtained as

P = 2.8 x 10 -8 crash/year.
Nomenclature and (reference values in numerical exam-
Lothar Si~tterlin [5] gives an example as to consider pies)
the fight density and accident rate being uniform in the
entire area of the Federal Republic of Germany. After R distance between airport and facility (5 miles
ref. [5], the annual crash n u m b e r of fighters on the = 8 km),
entire area of F R G (2.5 x 1011 m 2) is 25, and it results /,, accident rate per taking off a n d / o r landing,
that the annual crash probability onto the plant with an ( = 1.8 X 10 - 6 crash/taking off), (4.9 x 10 --6
effective area 100 m x 100 m is evaluated as follows: crash/landing),
1 × 10 4 m 2 Ph accident rate per flight hour ( = 2.0 × 10 -5
P = 25 X = 1 X 10 -6 crash/year. (9) crash/hr),
2.5 x 1011 m 2
PI accident rate per flight distance ( = 1.6 ×
1 0 - T c r a s h / m o l e = 1.0 x 10 -7 crash/km),
A effective area of facility ( = 100 m x 100 m =
3. Conclusion 3.9 x 10 -3 mole2),
x distance between flight path and facility ( = 5
The formulae to evaluate the probability of an miles = 8 km),
aircraft crash onto plants are reviewed accompanied by Cd maximum glide ratio ( = 12 m i l e / m i l e = 12
a numerical example each flying pattern. m/m),
 T. Kobayashi / Probability analysis of aircraft crash
c~ maximum turn ratio ( = 0.1 deg/m),
number of landing a n d / o r taking off per
year ( = 5 × 10 3 times/year),
number of flights per year ( = 1 × 10 4
flights/year),
number of flights on racetrack pattern per
year ( = 1 × 105 flights/year)
k decay constant ( = 1.125),
/ flight density in free flight zone ( = 1 × 10-5
flight/km3),
D, F, Ps crash site distribution function for each
flying pattern respectively (variable).
References
[1] John M. Vallance, A study of the probability of an aircraft
using Waukegan Memorial Airport hitting the Zion Sta-
211
tion, Pickard, Lower and Associates, Inc., Washington, DC
(1972.5).
[2] P.K. Niyogi, R.C. Boritz and A.K. Bliattacharyya, Safety
design of nuclear power plants against aircraft impacts,
Proceedings of the Topical Meeting on Thermal Reactor
Safety, July 31-August 4, 1977, San Valley, Idaho, pp.
3-478 to 3-493.
[3] Kenneth A. Solomon, Analysis of ground hazards due to
aircraft and missiles, Hazard Prevention, Journal of the
System Safety Society 12, No. 4 (1976.3-4).
[4] K. Hornyik, A.H. Robinson and J.E. Grund, Evaluation of
aircraft hazards at the boardman Nuclear Plant Site, Port-
land General Electric Company, PGE-2001 (1973.5).
[5] Lothar Siitterlin, Zur Auslegung Kerntechnischer Anlagen
Gegen Einwirkungen Von Aussen, IRS-W-12 (1975.3).