Aviation expert suggests altitude violation during flyover over Cape Town stadium
In Cape Town, South Africa, aviation expert Guy Leitch suggested that an aircraft flying over Cape Town Stadium may have flown significantly lower than the limits approved by the South African Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). In his assessment, the flight altitude may have been around 50 feet, while the CAA, in his view, was unlikely to have approved a flyover below 250 feet.
Leitch, publisher and editor of SA Flyer magazine, said this in an interview with TimesLIVE. The CAA said it is checking compliance with the approved flight plan and reviewing data on the planning, preparation and execution of the flyover.
Altitude assessment
Leitch said he had not seen approved airshow flyovers at an altitude below 250 feet. In his view, numerous video recordings, partly supported by Flightradar24 data, indicate that the aircraft was substantially below that level.
At the same time, Airlink maintains that Flightradar24 data and other similar sources do not make it possible to conclusively establish that the aircraft was flying at 50 feet. Leitch agreed that such data do not allow for a precise conclusion about that altitude, but insisted that, in his view, the aircraft was significantly below 250 feet.
More current news is available on the UA.News Telegram channel Telegram.
Risks for spectators
The expert noted that descending an aircraft to an altitude of 50 feet is common during landing. However, he said the situation differed because the flyover took place above approximately 56,000 people in the stadium, which substantially increased the risks in the event of an unforeseen situation.
Leitch called the flyover a stunt that, in his view, went beyond what was reasonable and probably approved. He also rejected a possible explanation involving confusion between height above the ground and altitude above sea level, stressing that this could not be an excuse for professional pilots.
The conversation also addressed the fact that Airlink did not apply for a third flyover. Leitch was skeptical of the explanation related to weather conditions and suggested that the issue of the very low flyover had become too high-profile for the company.
