Impaired Pilots

On a flight to Galesburg, IL last week, we were utilizing Quad Cities
Approach for VFR flight following. Being a Thursday morning, we
pretty much had the airwaves to ourselves, with the exception of a
Cirrus driver who was coming in to land in the Quad Cities.

The first call we heard from our Cirrus pilot was him asking approach
if he was "headed in the right direction for Rwy 5?" What caught our
attention, aside from the non-standard radio lingo, was the fact that
he was doing a PERFECT Truman-Capote-on-qualudes immitation.

This seemed a bit odd, but the controller cooly assigned a vector to
the pilot -- to which the Cirrus pilot slowly and way too deliberately
responded "Raaaahger, come to a heading of threeee waaaaaahn
zeeeeerrrroo, Ceeeerrrusss November XXXX..."

Mary and I started laughing, thinking that the guy surely must know
the approach controller, or something. It wasn't a southern accent
the guy was using, but rather a Robin-Williams-pretending-to-be-stoned
voice, with that added little Capote-ish lilt that absolutely NO ONE
could be using in a natural way.

With no witty response forthcoming from our severely under-worked
controller, however, we started to suspect that perhaps our Cirrus
driver wasn't playing with a full deck.

Then, at the next call, our hapless pilot, sounding like a cross
between Huckleberry Hound Dog and Foster Brooks, announced waaaay too
slowly and deliberately that he "haadd the aiiirporrrrt in sight, and
woulld like vectors to Runway 5."

By now it seemed pretty clear that (a) the guy didn't know which
direction Rwy 5 faced, and that (b) he was impaired in some fashion.

The fact that he was flying a $300K airplane seemed to eliminate the
possibility that he was just a nervous student flying into controlled
airspace for the first time, but I suppose it's possible.

The last call we heard was ATC switching him over to tower, to which
he again responded in a sleepy, slurred, non-standard way. We just
shrugged, and proceeded on to our destination.

The episode brought a few questions to mind:

1. When does a controller assume that a pilot is impaired? What
mis-steps are required, or what actions must be observed, for ATC to
presume impairment?

2. What would ATC actually *do* about it?

3. If I, or another pilot, witness an obviously impaired pilot, are we
legally (not morally, which I think is easily answered) required to
actually *do* anything about it?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
m...
The first call we heard from our Cirrus pilot was him asking approach
if he was "headed in the right direction for Rwy 5?" What caught our
attention, aside from the non-standard radio lingo, was the fact that
he was doing a PERFECT Truman-Capote-on-qualudes immitation.


Possibly a speech impediment?


Michael

I have a student who was so slow and halting on the radio that once another
pilot told him on the radio to give up flying.

He still is very slow and other pilots tell me he gives the impression that
English is a second language, but at least it is now acceptable. I suspect
he will always sound a little funny.

Jay Honeck wrote:

This seemed a bit odd, but the controller cooly assigned a vector to
the pilot -- to which the Cirrus pilot slowly and way too deliberately
responded "Raaaahger, come to a heading of threeee waaaaaahn
zeeeeerrrroo, Ceeeerrrusss November XXXX..."

Sounds like any of a number of pilots local to this area.

George Patterson
If a man gets into a fight 3,000 miles away from home, he *had* to have
been looking for it.

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
m...
1. When does a controller assume that a pilot is impaired?

Never. Why would they make that assumption?

What
mis-steps are required, or what actions must be observed, for ATC to
presume impairment?

I suppose if the pilot actually said something like "I had a half dozen
drinks an hour ago, and I'm really drunk", ATC might at that point be able
to consider impairment as a possibility.

2. What would ATC actually *do* about it?

Nothing. Do you think ATC is the FAA's watchdog? They aren't, you know.

3. If I, or another pilot, witness an obviously impaired pilot, are we
legally (not morally, which I think is easily answered) required to
actually *do* anything about it?

How could you possibly be required by law to do something about it? You
watched the last Seinfeld episode a few too many times, I think.

It think it's funny that you think the moral question is easily answered.
It's not even an easy question to answer when you have witnessed, with your
eyes, some clear cut violation of the FARs. But you think you can reliably
assess impairment simply by what was said on the radio? What a crock.

Am I saying you shouldn't do something about a pilot you think might be
flying drunk? No. But at the same time, you should definitely rethink what
you consider to be sufficient evidence.

Pete

Jay Honeck wrote:

The first call we heard from our Cirrus pilot was him asking approach
if he was "headed in the right direction for Rwy 5?"

... responded "Raaaahger, come to a heading of threeee waaaaaahn
zeeeeerrrroo, Ceeeerrrusss November XXXX..."

Then, at the next call, our hapless pilot ... announced waaaay too
slowly and deliberately that he "haadd the aiiirporrrrt in sight, and
woulld like vectors to Runway 5."

By now it seemed pretty clear that (a) the guy didn't know which
direction Rwy 5 faced, and that (b) he was impaired in some fashion.

Let's see, now ... 310 for Runway 5 with the field in sight looks
like a reasonable approximation to a right base leg.

However, I'm not actually a pilot, so I may be *way* off here. :-)

In article ,
"Peter Duniho" wrote:



Nothing. Do you think ATC is the FAA's watchdog? They aren't, you know.

I know of at least one case where ATC (Tower) did take action. A Cub on
wheels almost landed in the seaplane base lake. That along with
generally erratic flying prompted the controller to request my
department to see what the problem was once the Cub landed. The problem
is both occupants were drunk, I'm talking .20 or better drunk.

--
Dale L. Falk

There is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing
as simply messing around with airplanes.

http://home.gci.net/~sncdfalk/flying.html

Jay,

I think I know who you are talking about, he ALWAYS sounds like that
(confused). There aren't that many around Moline if he was local.



"Robert Briggs" wrote in message
...
Jay Honeck wrote:

The first call we heard from our Cirrus pilot was him asking approach
if he was "headed in the right direction for Rwy 5?"

... responded "Raaaahger, come to a heading of threeee waaaaaahn
zeeeeerrrroo, Ceeeerrrusss November XXXX..."

Then, at the next call, our hapless pilot ... announced waaaay too
slowly and deliberately that he "haadd the aiiirporrrrt in sight, and
woulld like vectors to Runway 5."

By now it seemed pretty clear that (a) the guy didn't know which
direction Rwy 5 faced, and that (b) he was impaired in some fashion.

Let's see, now ... 310 for Runway 5 with the field in sight looks
like a reasonable approximation to a right base leg.

However, I'm not actually a pilot, so I may be *way* off here. :-)

What you describe may not be a chemically induced impairment, but
possibly a speech impediment or psychological condition.

I had a friend who is a gifted engineer but has a speech impediment
which causes him to talk in a halting, varying inflection manner.

What you describe may not be a chemically induced impairment, but
possibly a speech impediment or psychological condition.

You know, I honestly hadn't considered that.

He sure sounded impaired to us -- and the non-standard radio terminology was
certainly peculiar -- but what the heck. I suppose he could just speak
differently than us.

Or, he was loaded.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"