Increasing risk of collision over turning points???

[twizzle]

I quote from the CAA Accident Prevention Leaflet 1 of 2002 March. .. ."With increased use of GPS, pilots are now often tracking exactly overhead features which they nominate as turning points, increasing the risk of a collision with others doing the same thing.. .. .We have reminded pilots and air trafiic controllers that 'VRPs' marked on the CAA charts are "visual reference points", not "visual reporting points".. .. .Traffic is recomended to report its position with reference to these 'VRPs', but not to overfly them, and certainly not hold over them unless in controlled airspace."unquote. .. .Does the CAA have a valid recommendation based on reported airmisses or are they not in the real world General Aviation?

[FNG]

The advice given by the CAA seems to me to reflect real world common sense: we ought to avoid honeypots, else we might be stung.

[tacpot]

I do hope the CAA aren't beginning to worry about the fact we are all flying more accurately since the advent of GPS? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="rolleyes.gif" /> . .. .I guess not, but it does read that way.

[LowNSlow]

I think they are concerned that we are all flying accuraetly to the same point whereas pre-GPS we would have been happy to be (or deliberately be) a mile or so to one side of it....... .. .I must confess to using VRP's as waypoints when departing LTN Zone. At least they know exactly where I am when I call up for a quick chat <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" />

[Noggin]

The function of a Waypoint is to check ones position, either visually or by means of radio aids. With the advent of GPS we know exactly where we are all the time, so why do we still require Waypoints?. .. .Is it that we have not updated our thinking in line with the technology currently available?. .. .There are countless books defining waypoints to within a few feet, what possible use are they? We are not on a bombing mission!

[LowNSlow]

Noggin, I meant waypoint as in waypoint on a route. I've always referred to a point on a route where a direction change or a position check is expected as a waypoint. What do you call them? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="confused.gif" /> . .. .They don't have to be defined in books, you can define them yourself with or without a GPS. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="biggrin.gif" />

[Noggin]

I was going back to basics. We only really needed turning points (Waypoints)on a route because that was the only way you could prove where you were, hence the establishment of radio beacons. The concept of R Nav was to be able to go direct, GPS is the ultimate R Nav, so really we only need two points, Start and Finish. We still use waypoints because we have been programmed that routes must have turning points! ATC constraints are really the only justification remaining;the original concept of Waypoints is redundant with GPS.. .. .Personally I never use waypoints with GPS, it gives me all the information I need without making life difficult, and reduces the chance of entering errors. I used to use an INS with no waypoint facility, how delightfully simple it was.. .. .I have witnessed many inexperienced pilots with the books of GPS fixes. Unfortunately, they program all of this stuff in and then fly head in cockpit to some mythical point that has no relevance at all, keeping no look out for the other idiot heading to the same meaningless point. Not surprising there is a safety note about it.