Airlink withdraws application for third flight over stadium ahead of Springboks and All Blacks match

The South African Rugby Union (Saru) announced that another air show will take place before the third test match between South Africa and New Zealand, which will be held at the FNB Stadium in Johannesburg on Saturday.

This decision was made following widespread public outcry caused by an Airlink flight path during the second test match in Cape Town. At that time, two aircraft flew extremely close to the roof of the DHL Stadium, with subsequent reports indicating that the second aircraft was only 15 meters above the structure.

Videos of this maneuver circulated on social media, sparking mass criticism due to potential danger. Nevertheless, Airlink defended its route by providing data from its black box and insisting that the routine execution complied with 'approved and rehearsed safety height and speed limits for the flypast.'

The airline also clarified that both flights were operated by highly qualified crews, each consisting of three senior captains holding the positions of pilot-in-command, second pilot, and technical/safety specialist.

South African Sports Minister, Gethon McKenzie, also positively commented on the display, posting on X: 'It is well known that we have the best pilots in the world; it was spectacular.'

Despite critics considering this high-risk stunt a potentially dangerous incident, low-altitude flypasts remain a beloved tradition in South African rugby, most vividly associated with the 1995 Rugby World Cup final between the Springboks and All Blacks.

The series of four matches is currently tied at 1:1, with two more games remaining, culminating in the historic final on September 12th in Baltimore, USA.

On Monday, Springboks coach Rassie Erasmus announced the squad for the third test, making four changes and one positional swap in the starting lineup.

The airline Airlink transmitted flight data recorder data from two aircraft that performed a low pass over the DHL Stadium in Cape Town shortly before the second match between the Springboks and All Blacks on Saturday to the aviation regulator.

This action followed the attention garnered by video footage of the flyover in global media. The New York Post quoted a witness who suggested the flyover could have resulted in a disaster.

In a statement released by the airline to IOL via representative Linden Burns, it was stated: 'Airlink has voluntarily provided this set of data to SACAA for independent analysis and verification of the flyover's compliance with the flight permit.'

A flight data recorder is an accident-resistant recorder installed on passenger jets. It records dozens of readings several times per second, including altitude, speed, and heading, and is typically examined by investigators after incidents.

Burns added that the airline would refrain from any further comments until the regulator completes its data review.

Aviation analyst Guy Leach told IOL that the aircraft flew lower than required, but noted that the flyover itself was not reckless. In his opinion, 'they followed an approved sequence, they flew within acceptable limits, and it was not fundamentally dangerous. There was sufficient safety margin. My opinion is that they probably went a little too far. It would have been better for everyone if they had flown slightly higher.'

Two Embraer aircraft—a green E190 with registration number ZS-YAE and a black E195 with registration number ZS-YDE—flew over the stadium in formation shortly before the start of the second match between the Springboks and All Blacks, in front of an audience of over 56,000 people.

SA won the match with a score of 33-26, thus leveling the four-match series in the great rugby derby at 1-1, with Cheslin Kolbe scoring 18 points from penalties.

The flyover was broadcast live on television, and the clip spread within minutes, causing viewers to feel that the aircraft approached dangerously close to the stadium roof.

Airlink stated that the flyover was carefully planned and rehearsed in advance, as it was intended to be executed at a low altitude and at a speed of about 150 knots, which is approximately 280 km/h. The airline also reported that SACAA and the Air Traffic and Navigation Service provided guidance, approval, and support for this flight.

Each aircraft was accompanied by three senior captains: one served as the commander, the second as the co-pilot, and the third was responsible for technical safety and checks.