As an aviation geek, I love listening to air traffic control audio, and always enjoy the VASAviation YouTube channel, which does a great job covering interesting air traffic control interactions.
Continue reading: Air Traffic Controller Argues Endlessly With Pilot
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
Yeah… that controller has no idea what they’re talking about. And it’s incredibly reckless (on both of them but especially the controller) to continue arguing back and forth on the radio. The pilot should have just said “roger” and dropped it or asked for a phone number once on the ground.
If you read more of the comments it sounds like this controller as a wide reputation at this airport as awful to deal with.
Just using logic her interpretation makes zero sense (which the pilot tried to explain): if you turn base abeam the numbers, you will roll out on final *over* the numbers, which will make it a bit difficult to touch down on the numbers….
I too am a general aviation pilot (sport pilot) and agree that a short approach will not turn abeam the numbers.
Depending on the length of the runway turning abeam the numbers 1000 ft AGL (the usual pattern altitude for GA) it’s going to be damn hard to impossible to get the plane down and stop it before you run out of runway. It also takes all of the usual landmarks and landing aids out of the equation (PAPI, pavement landing markers, normal sight picture).
Not saying such a landing couldn’t be be performed, but I sure wouldn’t do one by choice, and it wasn’t what the pilot in question was asking for.
On a short approach the Wind and/or aircraft type is the deciding factor, of how wide or narrow you will have to make the turn.
The objective is for the (student)Pilot to Cut the power to idle abeam the Numbers, and then glide the aircraft through a descending 180 degree turn onto the 1000’ markers.
The controller is full of BS, just having a bad day 😀
As a former tower controller…. This was the controllers lack of planning. When I worked student pilots I would always ask how far they expected to take their downwind out. If they were gonna keep it tight would figure out if I was able to make it work reference my straight in traffic. If not it’s simple. Tell them to extend their upwind or have them do a 360 in the downwind to accommodate both. I’m not saying I always made the right decision, but simply explaining to the pilot you messed up is much easier than trying to place blame on the pilot who did nothing wrong.
During my training I was asked to 360 or extend several times for spacing and it was never an issue at all. Never expected a mea culpa from the tower guy (Class D airspace) either. It happens; and the ATC folks are just trying to maintain spacing to keep everyone safe.
What surprises me here most is that the controller has access to google while in the tower
I was a controller and had to put up with some pilots who wanted to be “the flying air traffic controller!”
Holy cow. I haven't flown in years but it sounds to me like the Gal doesn't know what she's talking about and is bs'ing.
Oh yes! I flew in to DTO in September with a friend of mine and luckily I didn’t do anything to get gripped at, but our jaws were absolutely on the floor at the way she was speaking to some of the other pilots. She’s having full on conversations over the frequency, and some of what she was saying, was absolutely hateful.
"Preserve the tape" usually stops the controller trying to fly the plane in my experience.
1. Googled while plugged in = suspended
2. Have time to argue that much = didnt matter if approach was short or not
3. Argue with pilot in critical phase of flight = pilot report and subsequent suspension
There’s no excuse for this behaviour
Because you were an advisor not a controller per se. The Pilot in Command has the full say and final authority over the safety of the flight. Remember you won't be the one they put in the box if something goes wrong.
Oh ben, morons like you that write for a living while the rest of us run the world wouldnt last 2 minutes in an air traffic controller's chair!
Just wow! Although I agree with most here that the controller was out of line. The pilot should not have taken the bait and should have shut down the conversation. I like the comment to advise “hold the tape”. This is one time when I would’ve advised the Controller to expect a phone call from me. After I was on the ground.
As a controller both military and civilian, I have seen pilots turn toward base/final abeam the numbers and dive for the runway. I tried looking up that inormation in varios FAA Publicstions and one of the manuals is the Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM). In the secrion pilot controller glossary (MAKE SHORT APPROACH) it states:
Used by ATC to inform a pilot to alter his/her traffic pattern so as to make a short
final approach.
Ref, AIM PCG M−1
If there is another reference approved by the FAA that the pilot used to describe a short approach then please post it. Power off 180 is a procedure used to by flight instructors to describe such maneuver during a checkride. It al depends on the altitude where the pilot has to glide the aircraft to the runway and it can be anywhere from 0 to 3 mile final.
Thank you
Totally agree... Something that could have been discussed on the ground preferably on the phone.
Unprofessional. That should ALL have taken place on the phone, not the frequency. I say this as a retired ATCS.
I’m going to call Obiden and Harris and see what they say and if they can make a public presentation on what the right thing is to do Obiden and Harris have the answers
Wow. Absolutely unprofessional at best, possibly reckless on the part of the controller. I'm human & We all have bad days, This controller seems to have a reputation, Allegedly. Pilot did a great job keeping his cool, being rational & legitimately seemed to want to keep things from escalating. With any luck we can all learn a thing or 2 from this exchange.
What a total embarrassment to the ATC profession! That controller needs to be reprimanded, and spend some time in the training department. I was argumenative my first year as an FPL controller, until I listened to how bad it sounded on the frequency. After being sat down and explained that these pilot are the customers, provide them with a service. That changed my mindset for a 32 year career.
As a retired Air Traffic Controller, I am embarrassed by this exchange. This may exhibit a common problem wherein the Controller may also be a pilot.
I flew in and out of KDTO a couple months ago. KDTO is a very busy AP with lots of student pilots. I too was embarrassed of the mentioned controller's unprofessional attitude. Many controllers can be terse, and in some situations that terseness helps to get a point across to those flying in the airspace. I am open if a controller feels the need to bluntly explain to me that I did not exactly follow their direction. When piloting an aircraft in a busy airspace, safety is everything and should never to be taken lightly.
BUT...while flying in KDTO's airspace, I found the controller in question to be very unprofessional, where her venomous attitude created an additional and unnecessary distraction for me while I was piloting my airplane. Her beat down of every pilot in the pattern was not only a huge distraction, but it was also a very brazen waste of precious radio time. At one point, she told another pilot, "if you cannot fly over the highway, then do not come here!". In short order, the pilot repeated her words verbatim. That was tragic and funny at the same time. I am hopeful the controller's leadership at KDTO finds this feedback and creates a retraining solution. No one needs to be beaten down by their chosen profession, but when it is time to re-evaluate the safety of those within the airspace, it is an issue that needs to be addressed.
Looks like someone needs to go back to school, but NOT for air trafficking. Miss manners to learn to shut the heck up before this person gets people killed, small airport or not.
Sit down with the air traffic controller and then take her up for a flight and show her a short approach and a 180 degree power of approach
I can recall the events where PRES REGHAN FIRED A BUNCH OF ATC AGENTS FOR BEING WRONG???
What is the purpose of a short approach? I would think most people make a short approach because for some reason be it emergency or personal choice decide a long approach is not appropriate. If traffic is not a problem it would appear to me this is a pilots decision as to how abbreviated this short approach will be. ie. Smoke in cockpit may require a shorter approach than say person air sick. Vs. Engine failure. The air traffic controllers job is to maintain safe separation not fly the airplane from the tower.
Totally unacceptable behavior of a controller. Controllers are in a tower and not in the aircraft. Safety is the responsibility of the pilot.
This Local Controller needs to reference page 9-24 thru 9-27 of her employer’s (FAA) “Airplane Flying Handbook.”
She’s about to be humbled.
I've got 30k hours and I've never flown a short approach. Nor would I. Turn abeam the numbers, nope. Land long nope. Controller was having a bad day.
As an instrument rated GA pilot (practicing commercial), I agree with the general sentiment here. Even practicing the engine out landings (power off 180) you're not turning abeam the numbers. That phase of flight is also not conducive to an extensive "learning period", and that's not really a controllers job. A "short approach" is anything that is less than a "standard approach", much like an "extended downwind" is anything more. I don't have as much flight experience as many of my other GA friends, but I don't know that we have any approach procedure that has us making a base turn abeam the numbers that isn't an emergency.
As an instrument rated GA pilot (practicing commercial), I agree with the general sentiment here. Even practicing the engine out landings (power off 180) you're not turning abeam the numbers. That phase of flight is also not conducive to an extensive "learning period", and that's not really a controllers job. A "short approach" is anything that is less than a "standard approach", much like an "extended downwind" is anything more. I don't have as much flight experience as many of my other GA friends, but I don't know that we have any approach procedure that has us making a base turn abeam the numbers that isn't an emergency. I9
What I think is someone (in the tower) was having a bad day… and I say this as a credentialed pilot and a former military ATC. PS: long chats over the radio are (usually) not recommended, the protocol is to have the pilot call the tower by phone once on the ground.
Whyy google, as in the verb google? There are so many better options available and who don't track you.
I spent 23 years ad a controller and first line supervisor at some of the busiest air traffic control towers in the Faa Western region. San Jose ATCT as a controller and Hayward ATCT as a first line supervisor before and after the PATCO strike.
This controller at San Carlos should have given the phone number for the tower and made their supervisor aware of what happened. The controller chastising the pilot over the air was unacceptable and should have been addressed.
I'm a retired airline pilot for 25 years. Before that I was a flight instructor. In all my years I have never heard an exchange like this. That controller was unprofessional.
Well, as a non native language speaker and non pilot, but recognizer the weekend people in many ways, i think the controller was completely wrong! What type of controller would looking for something on Google?
...they're(????)... It's just ONE person, a she, so we say, ...SHE doesn't know....
Make sense?
THEY is 3rd person PLURAL
HE/SHE/IT is 3rd person S*******r!
You fill in the above!
And while all that conversation was going on there may have been other aircraft approaching the airport who would like to establish contact with the tower.
The Air Traffic Controller is asserting her authority as being right at the wrong time and by tying up the airwaves while other pilots are needing to departvorcland.This clearly should have been discussed over the phone. I Do NOT BELIEVE that this Controller is correct in her assessment.
I hope that her supervisor has a discussion about her UNPROFESSIONAL BEHAVIOR!
This is why she's at a small airport, because she's NOT COMPETENT to work at a large airport.
Unfortunately, I don't believe she should be an AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLER until she gets more training!
I've been a flight instructor for 35 years, with 7800 hours of dual given. A short approach is anything that's short of a standard pattern of 45 degrees aft of the wing before turning base. So yes, the instructor is correct, a power off 180 is a short approach. Also, I couldn't find short approach listed in the pilot/controller glossary.
38 years ATC. A normal base turn for a small aircraft is is about 45 degrees off of the numbers. This typically results in about a one mile final. Anything inside that would technically be a short approach. She wasn’t scanning or she would have reached out and instructed the pilot to turn base. She obviously didn’t need the base turn because she had time to argue with the pilot. I.E. another aircraft running in behind him. It was purely ego on her part.
Having just come across this incident it beggars belief. I am not a pilot nor do I fly and finding out that there such incompetent idiots in charge of flight control I await a terrible catastrophe in the name of diversity. Surely in such matters competence should be the deciding factor for such work?
This is an uncalled-for comment and without merit and the author of this comment seems to be one of those individuals who generates and spreads their own negative opinions without any basis for their critical view. In this instant both the controller and the pilot are qualified to complete the operation - a day VMC/VFR approach with apparently minimal other traffic. We have misunderstandings frequently and the way we sort it out is by each side presenting their case - but not on VHF/UHF. That discussion is better dealt with after the aircraft is parked and the telephone is dialed. Eventually, if a chronic problem is identified resolutions are reached and procedures are created. Given this clearance I would have expected the controller to be more specific with regards to, "Call abeam the numbers" or "Start your base turn abeam the numbers" or some other brief but succinct instruction as to what was expected. We have our own lexicon in aviation that was developed for our specific needs (brief and concise). If this incident can offer anything worthwhile it is to direct the users' attention to Chapter 4, Section 2 of the AIM (Aeronautical Information Manual) for accepted use of radio communications. Examples of my own pet peeves: inserting decimal points in reported altitudes and using "Oh" when "Zero" is indicated, and finally, using radio "space" for inappropriate dissertations.
Something else to keep in mind is that there are a LOT of new controllers out there. The FAA is trying to pump them out as fast as the flight schools and ab initio programs pump out pilots. If there is a "difference of expectations" like this one, best to either describe the maneuver you want to be approved for or ask what the controller expects/needs. Better to negotiate the outcome than argue about the result.
Then there is the pilot ultimate takeover. "Unable". If you say that be ready for the answer to "say intentions". Sometimes that results in declaring an emergency (pilot's emergency authority) to do what you need to (e.g. deviate around a thunderstorm). There I was.......forty years of flying. I've got a few.
As of March 2024, this controller still works in the Denton Tower and continues to berate pilots everyday.
She needs placed in a new job... In other words, she wouldn't be arguing with another pilot bc she needs FIRED...
To paraphase House from the show House,MD:
"Yeah, who needs a pilot's license when you have Wi-Fi"
I agreee that the controler is wrong on many levels. In addition, what the controller is asking for is also not in line with appropriate safety and risk management since she admits this would result in a landing about mid-field. The standard is the First 3rd of the runway.