Originally Posted by
Concours77
I am no psychologist. This is supposition only. ATC was exemplary, and there is no reason to suggest another and different approach to convince the pilot to attempt a landing. He did good. But he was out of character, ATC needs to be direct and authoritative, it is in the job description.
So. The pilot is described as outgoing, smart, and compassionate. In the scheme of things, we give what we get, so any “personality” can be simply the result of what we want back from people. A “compliant”, and pleasing/pleasant person might not be amenable to soft understanding response from authority. ATC is authority, and morphing from authority into empathetic “buddy” might be the opposite of what is needed. People pleasers are generally subject to compliance, it gets learned into the dynamic.
“I am going to give you a heading, you need to comply, and get that aircraft configured.” “NOW!!...” “Beebo” sounds like a bit of a spoiled brat. Sweet nothings don’t work on such a person. He may have been “placated” all his life. It is clear that suicidal or not, he needed some talking to, by an authority, not a buddy.
imo
I'm not sure that going Full Metal Jacket on him, with something like "what is your major malfunction numbnuts?" would have been the best course of action. That approach proved costly for Gunnery Sergeant Hartman in the movie! The point is that this guy was effectively holding a weapon to the controller's head. He needed to be calmed down in order to get him to be compliant, not agitated with authoritarian commands. I think the softly softly approach in these circumstances is almost instinctive, and I think the outcome was the best that could be expected. It certainly could have been a helluva lot worse. But yes, the controller did an excellent job.