Narrative:

I was inbound to the osu airport. I was acting as a flight instructor and was returning from a local training flight with my student. We reported southwest of the field and were given subsequent landing instructions from the tower controller. While maneuvering in the traffic pattern; I heard the tower controller attempting to call an aircraft in the blind that was apparently inside osu's class D airspace without clearance. There was no response to the controller's radio calls. Shortly after that; an aircraft called the osu tower advising 'student pilot' and 2 mi out. The tower controller responded to the student pilot with instructions as well as 'possible pilot deviation;' but offered no explanation for the 'possible pilot deviation.' there was an obvious tone of contempt for the pilot in the tower controller's voice. This only served to add additional stress to the pilot and make a bad situation worse. On a subsequent radio transmission from the tower controller to the student pilot; while the student pilot was still in the traffic pattern and prior to landing; the tower controller ordered the pilot to 'contact the tower' after landing. This added more stress to the student pilot. It was obvious in his voice. The tower controller's tone was aggressive throughout the contact. His actions were unprofessional. Obviously the deviation had to be addressed; but it would have been better addressed on the ground. The tower controller took a bad situation and made it worse. This had to have played a factor in how the student pilot approached his landing. I have addressed the controller's demeanor over the radio with the osu tower supervisor. He has seemed to be a little more guarded with his words; but his tone is still the same.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: FLT INSTRUCTOR EXPRESSED FRUSTRATION REGARDING UNPROFESSIONAL BEHAVIOR OF LCL CTLR AT OSU IN THE HANDLING OF A STUDENT PLT.

Narrative: I WAS INBOUND TO THE OSU ARPT. I WAS ACTING AS A FLT INSTRUCTOR AND WAS RETURNING FROM A LCL TRAINING FLT WITH MY STUDENT. WE RPTED SW OF THE FIELD AND WERE GIVEN SUBSEQUENT LNDG INSTRUCTIONS FROM THE TWR CTLR. WHILE MANEUVERING IN THE TFC PATTERN; I HEARD THE TWR CTLR ATTEMPTING TO CALL AN ACFT IN THE BLIND THAT WAS APPARENTLY INSIDE OSU'S CLASS D AIRSPACE WITHOUT CLRNC. THERE WAS NO RESPONSE TO THE CTLR'S RADIO CALLS. SHORTLY AFTER THAT; AN ACFT CALLED THE OSU TWR ADVISING 'STUDENT PLT' AND 2 MI OUT. THE TWR CTLR RESPONDED TO THE STUDENT PLT WITH INSTRUCTIONS AS WELL AS 'POSSIBLE PLTDEV;' BUT OFFERED NO EXPLANATION FOR THE 'POSSIBLE PLTDEV.' THERE WAS AN OBVIOUS TONE OF CONTEMPT FOR THE PLT IN THE TWR CTLR'S VOICE. THIS ONLY SERVED TO ADD ADDITIONAL STRESS TO THE PLT AND MAKE A BAD SIT WORSE. ON A SUBSEQUENT RADIO XMISSION FROM THE TWR CTLR TO THE STUDENT PLT; WHILE THE STUDENT PLT WAS STILL IN THE TFC PATTERN AND PRIOR TO LNDG; THE TWR CTLR ORDERED THE PLT TO 'CONTACT THE TWR' AFTER LNDG. THIS ADDED MORE STRESS TO THE STUDENT PLT. IT WAS OBVIOUS IN HIS VOICE. THE TWR CTLR'S TONE WAS AGGRESSIVE THROUGHOUT THE CONTACT. HIS ACTIONS WERE UNPROFESSIONAL. OBVIOUSLY THE DEV HAD TO BE ADDRESSED; BUT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER ADDRESSED ON THE GND. THE TWR CTLR TOOK A BAD SIT AND MADE IT WORSE. THIS HAD TO HAVE PLAYED A FACTOR IN HOW THE STUDENT PLT APCHED HIS LNDG. I HAVE ADDRESSED THE CTLR'S DEMEANOR OVER THE RADIO WITH THE OSU TWR SUPVR. HE HAS SEEMED TO BE A LITTLE MORE GUARDED WITH HIS WORDS; BUT HIS TONE IS STILL THE SAME.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.