I guess we start to chase an important point, which bothers me for quite some time. The mutual understanding of VFR and IFR.
If I read @piperboy84:
Was cleared for TO from 27 at Granada today departing via the W VRP ... a W departure I was given ...
I am assuming a VFR flight.
If I read the very important hint of @Genghis the Engineer:
Plus, at risk of stating the obvious, 15 degrees left of a straight track to point W from LEGR, takes him towards the holding pattern around GDA VOR and/or the outbound track for the ILS from GDA (there's only an ILS on 09, followed presumably by a circling approach, according to the Spanish AIP), which is probably where the chap "practicing ILSs" was, and will have degraded that pilot's IFR separation minima.
he is talking of risks related to IFR procedures.
An ordinary VFR pilot conducting a VFR flight seldom looks at the IFR procedures of the airport taken off. I have to admit, me too. Visual routes may be set by VRP and sometimes arrows on the plates, but the VFR charts won't give you ideas where the IFR routes and procedures are. If flying VFR in a control zone, I have to rely on tower to separate me from IFR and they have to rely on me to talk early as possible when doing something unexpected. The ordinary VFR pilot, most of the times, will have no clue what and where the SID climbout for IFR departure is.
Given the vast addiction to electronic moving map solutions, it may be wise to discuss adding an overlay of the IFR procedures also to electronic VFR solutions ?!