Narrative:

Arb tower is an ATC entry level tower. The attitude of the tower controllers is wrong. They try to fly the airplane. They do not understand that the PIC is the final person responsible. They intimidate the student pilots, which is a very dangerous situation. I have seen them give instructions to students that are contrary to what they have been taught. This then confuses the student. This is a dangerous situation. These controllers are there for traffic separation, not to instruct students. When in the above mentioned case, I as the instructor took over, the controller then required me to land when I refused to do his unsafe maneuver. I landed and he refused to talk. I took back off and he required me to return -- when a supervisor was present. I did so. Supervisor pulled tapes and agreed with me. Also said this is a long term problem and is getting worse. The union is standing behind the controllers and even though this individual has had numerous complaints and retraining, he only follows correct procedures when he is under investigation, then he goes back to his old ways of trying to be PIC through intimidation and threats of violation. He is going to get a student killed! I will pursue this conduct with FAA. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter stated that he has recently discussed the incidents with the ATCT manager and has been assured that the problem is being resolved. The problems described by the reporter included shouting at students, trying to fly the aircraft, instructing the students to fly wide and long patterns, and ordering the student and instructor to land and call the tower.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RPTR CLAIMS THAT A PARTICULAR ATCT CTLR AT ARB IS INSTRUCTING STUDENT PLTS IN THE TFC PATTERN TO FLY PROCS THAT ARE CONTRARY TO WHAT IS BEING TAUGHT BY THE FLT INSTRUCTORS.

Narrative: ARB TWR IS AN ATC ENTRY LEVEL TWR. THE ATTITUDE OF THE TWR CTLRS IS WRONG. THEY TRY TO FLY THE AIRPLANE. THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THAT THE PIC IS THE FINAL PERSON RESPONSIBLE. THEY INTIMIDATE THE STUDENT PLTS, WHICH IS A VERY DANGEROUS SIT. I HAVE SEEN THEM GIVE INSTRUCTIONS TO STUDENTS THAT ARE CONTRARY TO WHAT THEY HAVE BEEN TAUGHT. THIS THEN CONFUSES THE STUDENT. THIS IS A DANGEROUS SIT. THESE CTLRS ARE THERE FOR TFC SEPARATION, NOT TO INSTRUCT STUDENTS. WHEN IN THE ABOVE MENTIONED CASE, I AS THE INSTRUCTOR TOOK OVER, THE CTLR THEN REQUIRED ME TO LAND WHEN I REFUSED TO DO HIS UNSAFE MANEUVER. I LANDED AND HE REFUSED TO TALK. I TOOK BACK OFF AND HE REQUIRED ME TO RETURN -- WHEN A SUPVR WAS PRESENT. I DID SO. SUPVR PULLED TAPES AND AGREED WITH ME. ALSO SAID THIS IS A LONG TERM PROB AND IS GETTING WORSE. THE UNION IS STANDING BEHIND THE CTLRS AND EVEN THOUGH THIS INDIVIDUAL HAS HAD NUMEROUS COMPLAINTS AND RETRAINING, HE ONLY FOLLOWS CORRECT PROCS WHEN HE IS UNDER INVESTIGATION, THEN HE GOES BACK TO HIS OLD WAYS OF TRYING TO BE PIC THROUGH INTIMIDATION AND THREATS OF VIOLATION. HE IS GOING TO GET A STUDENT KILLED! I WILL PURSUE THIS CONDUCT WITH FAA. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED THAT HE HAS RECENTLY DISCUSSED THE INCIDENTS WITH THE ATCT MGR AND HAS BEEN ASSURED THAT THE PROB IS BEING RESOLVED. THE PROBS DESCRIBED BY THE RPTR INCLUDED SHOUTING AT STUDENTS, TRYING TO FLY THE ACFT, INSTRUCTING THE STUDENTS TO FLY WIDE AND LONG PATTERNS, AND ORDERING THE STUDENT AND INSTRUCTOR TO LAND AND CALL THE TWR.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.