VRPs over Built up Areas
VRPs over Built up Areas
Why are there VRPs over the precise centre of large built up areas that cannot possibly be safely alighted clear of by the average light aircraft, due to the controlled airspace above?
E.g. Guildford,Chelmsford, Tunbridge Wells, Haywards Heath....
UV
E.g. Guildford,Chelmsford, Tunbridge Wells, Haywards Heath....
UV
Because you are supposed to report passing or relative to them, not necessarily overfly them.
Incidentally they are officially "Visual Reference Points", not "Visual Reporting Points" as often assumed.
G
Incidentally they are officially "Visual Reference Points", not "Visual Reporting Points" as often assumed.
G
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: london
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yes; but how many times have your heard ATC say "report at Bishops Waltham" or "cleared into the zone via Bishops Waltham" etc etc.
Is the answer to reply " negative; but will enter the zone 1nm N of Bishops Waltham"?
Is the answer to reply " negative; but will enter the zone 1nm N of Bishops Waltham"?
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turniphead
Surely that would be the town/village being referred to, not the dead centre of the VRP.
You are not visual with a VRP when its underneath you, unless you are inverted
Surely that would be the town/village being referred to, not the dead centre of the VRP.
You are not visual with a VRP when its underneath you, unless you are inverted
ATC is being naughty, turniphead.
MATS Pt 1 Sec 3 Ch 4 3.5
When issuing routeing instructions to VFR flights, controllers should endeavour to avoid known areas of high traffic density, and should also avoid concentrating traffic over VRPs. In order to achieve this, instructing pilots to route over or hold at VRPs should be avoided whenever possible.
MATS Pt 1 Sec 3 Ch 4 3.5
When issuing routeing instructions to VFR flights, controllers should endeavour to avoid known areas of high traffic density, and should also avoid concentrating traffic over VRPs. In order to achieve this, instructing pilots to route over or hold at VRPs should be avoided whenever possible.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: london
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes of course ATC is being naughty and I appreciate your quoting their manual. hardly practical to quote that at them over the R/T.
So...I repeat ..do we say 'negative' , or do we comply and file complaint when on the ground.
Bar Shaker
The Bishps Waltham ('x in a circle) on the half mil is precisely overhead the town. Those of us who fly accurately to where we are told will find it right under our nose and quite clearly visible. There is never anything in any clearance to report when within sight of somewhere. Could mean any distance depending on viz.
So...I repeat ..do we say 'negative' , or do we comply and file complaint when on the ground.
Bar Shaker
The Bishps Waltham ('x in a circle) on the half mil is precisely overhead the town. Those of us who fly accurately to where we are told will find it right under our nose and quite clearly visible. There is never anything in any clearance to report when within sight of somewhere. Could mean any distance depending on viz.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 1,294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just use an element of common sense Turnip head. We are looking for you to be in the vicinity of rather than at a VRP when flying VFR.
For example we have a VRP notified as Cardiff Docks, rather a large expanse and it would be hard to be precisely over the top of it when it covers several acres.
So when in the vicinity of a VRP, report the VRP.
( of course vicinity of is an inexact science)
For example we have a VRP notified as Cardiff Docks, rather a large expanse and it would be hard to be precisely over the top of it when it covers several acres.
So when in the vicinity of a VRP, report the VRP.
( of course vicinity of is an inexact science)
Spicy Meatball
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Liverpool UK
Age: 41
Posts: 1,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Upon leaving the zone at Liverpool (via the Seaforth or Kirkby VRP) we are asked to report 5 for rejoin, which we do. Then we are told to route to the specific VRP, i.e. report Kirkby, not to the side or anything, but directly over it - and this is how I have been taught, so it seems there are more angles to this!
Maz
Maz
Why do it if it's not fun?
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 4,779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mazzy,
Kirkby and Seaforth are both inside controlled airspace. (Ok then, they are right on the edge of controlled airspace, such that I wouldn't want to overfly either of them without a clearance). Therefore, although concerns about being able to alight clear still apply, it's probably reasonable to assume that concerns about routing traffic overhead a "known areas of high traffic density" don't apply here, since ATC will know about traffic over the VRP and control it appropriately.
Outside of controlled airspace is a completely different question.....
FFF
---------------
Kirkby and Seaforth are both inside controlled airspace. (Ok then, they are right on the edge of controlled airspace, such that I wouldn't want to overfly either of them without a clearance). Therefore, although concerns about being able to alight clear still apply, it's probably reasonable to assume that concerns about routing traffic overhead a "known areas of high traffic density" don't apply here, since ATC will know about traffic over the VRP and control it appropriately.
Outside of controlled airspace is a completely different question.....
FFF
---------------
Spicy Meatball
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Liverpool UK
Age: 41
Posts: 1,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks mate 
Traffic is always routed one way, i.e. in at Kirkby out at Seaforth, and if you specifically request a non standard rejoin (standard procedures to Liverpool) then it will obviously only be granted if there is no conflicting traffic, who is implementing the standard
Maz
Traffic is always routed one way, i.e. in at Kirkby out at Seaforth, and if you specifically request a non standard rejoin (standard procedures to Liverpool) then it will obviously only be granted if there is no conflicting traffic, who is implementing the standard
Maz
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 278
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And having flown them a few times i think not about 1.5 over the city is decidely iffy for alighting clear(except maybe taking the Mersey) and marginal legally and as such I'm always gunning for not above 2 if poss.
I asked one of the controllers there once why it was such a low limit, and he said it was a historical thing dating back to when the airspace above was Class A and it was to therefore avoid having all the GA SVFR...if that airspace IS now class D is there any possibility of the standard zone clearances being not above 2??
I asked one of the controllers there once why it was such a low limit, and he said it was a historical thing dating back to when the airspace above was Class A and it was to therefore avoid having all the GA SVFR...if that airspace IS now class D is there any possibility of the standard zone clearances being not above 2??
