Visual Reporting Points

ChrisS

ChrisS

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Messages
121
Location
Oregon
Display Name
Display name:
ChrisS
I landed at Nampa, ID. today and was confused by someone joining the pattern (which I was in already) overhead the 'cheese factory'. Until I searched on Google for it I had absolutely no idea where it was or even what it looked like. It got me thinking about all the informal reporting points we use around my home airport, ones that visitors would have no idea about as they are not published anywhere and rely on local knowledge to know what and where they are. Anyone flying to the San Juan Islands in Washington for the first time will spend most of their time trying to identify all the reporting points being used by the locals and frequent visitors.

Should unofficial VRPs be used in RT? If so are they important enough to be published officially somewhere or are distances and directions in radio calls enough?
 
Last edited:
ChrisS said:
I landed at Nampa, ID. today and was confused by someone joining the pattern (which I was in already) overhead the 'cheese factory'. Until I searched on Google for it I had absolutely no idea where it was or even what it looked like. It got me thinking about all the informal reporting points we use around my home airport, ones that visitors would have no idea about as they are not published anywhere and rely on local knowledge to know what and where they are. Anyone flying to the San Juan Islands in Washington for the first time will spend most of their time trying to identify all the reporting points being used by the locals and frequent visitors.

Should unofficial VRPs be used in RT? If so are they important enough to be published officially somewhere or are distances and directions in radio calls enough?
Click to expand...

I think they should get adopted on charts, and if you look especially at C & D airports you'll notice they do, especially on the TCA charts. I think it's just fine. When I hear a call at an airport I'm coming into that I'm not familiar with, I just come back with my ID and position call and end it with "Unfamiliar with _____ Airport, need a better clue where you are". After that they typically come back with a generic course and bearing. It's never proven to be an issue for me. 90% of the people on frequency in the area will understand the first call.
 
I was laughing with you, not at you! ;)

TCA's, TRSA's, ARSA's... good names. Useful names.

Those all made sense to this telco/IT guy where everything's an acronym.
 
denverpilot said:
I was laughing with you, not at you! ;)

TCA's, TRSA's, ARSA's... good names. Useful names.

Those all made sense to this telco/IT guy where everything's an acronym.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm fine either way. The change really wasn't that extensive. TRSAs still exist BTW.... It's all good, never sweat the small stuff.
 
Henning said:
I think they should get adopted on charts, and if you look especially at C & D airports you'll notice they do, especially on the TCA charts. I think it's just fine.
Click to expand...

But what about the majority of the country that is only covered by sectional charts. An example, close to home for me, are the charts covering the Oregon Coast. Obvious reporting features include lakes, capes, lighthouses, jetties, mountains and rivers. Very few are named on the charts but locals are always using them to identify their location, and thinking about it this makes the radio call next to useless to anyone new to the area. I'm not saying that the charts should be more cluttered with names next to everything but I was questionning whether calls are more effective if positions are given using distance/direction/altitude. BTW, I must just point out that I'm as guilty as the next man/woman using my own vague and made-up reporting points.
 
If I don't klnow the area or landmark, I'll ask. I try to keep it to xxmile 45 runway xx or typical pattern reporting points.

Just to expand this a bit..... I also like to give that info when shooting a practice instrument approach since some pilots are not familiar with certain intersections/IAF's that we have on a plate in front of us. Eliminates confusion, makes life easier.
 
There are common reporting points noted in both the charts and the AFD. There are also the VP... fixes noted on the charts. Your idea is not new. It is just not as widespread as it should/could be. They appear as purple flags with a name.
Look at the TAC for Boston. Go west and find the Needham Towers (VPNED). Often used a landmark to keep you out of the Boston Bravo.
 
I was flying to some heavy flight training strip west of Myrtle beach one evening and the chatter was non-stop.

"Over the Mac Donalds" was most used, and I thought "There's a Mac Donalds every 1/2 mile down here...."
 
denverpilot said:
I was laughing with you, not at you! ;)

TCA's, TRSA's, ARSA's... good names. Useful names.

Those all made sense to this telco/IT guy where everything's an acronym.
Click to expand...

I still more the lost of Control Zones. That was so much easier than "Surface area of controlled airspace designated for an airport."
 
Good post Chris. I know at my field we often report a quarry for the 45 entry for downwind 24. The quarry is on the sectional but not a reporting point. Coming into PNE from the north east we'd report the turnpike bridge and then be asked to report the racetrack ( horse track) I'd always wonder how someone not from the philly area would know these things now a quarry, and bridge might be obvious as would a race track in an urban setting but a specific building or business not so much.
 
ChrisS said:
But what about the majority of the country that is only covered by sectional charts. An example, close to home for me, are the charts covering the Oregon Coast. Obvious reporting features include lakes, capes, lighthouses, jetties, mountains and rivers. Very few are named on the charts but locals are always using them to identify their location, and thinking about it this makes the radio call next to useless to anyone new to the area. I'm not saying that the charts should be more cluttered with names next to everything but I was questionning whether calls are more effective if positions are given using distance/direction/altitude. BTW, I must just point out that I'm as guilty as the next man/woman using my own vague and made-up reporting points.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I hear you, but as I said before, for the majority of traffic working into a given untowered field 95% of them are going to know because they are local to the area (doesn't take long to learn them either). So 95% of the time, making the local call is much quicker and more effective. For those times it's not clear or enough, I just pipe in with a "where's that?" and get a clarification. The system seems to work ok.
 
ChrisS said:
Should unofficial VRPs be used in RT? If so are they important enough to be published officially somewhere or are distances and directions in radio calls enough?
Click to expand...
I don't like it when folks use unofficial reporting points at nontowered airports -- leads to too much confusion for nonlocals (or even locals not familiar with them). I remember one time at Leesburg VA (JYO) when folks were calling entering the pattern from "the water tower," and seeing three water towers in the vicinity of the pattern entry area far enough apart that it mattered. That's probably why AC 90-42F TRAFFIC ADVISORY PRACTICES AT AIRPORTS WITHOUT OPERATING CONTROL TOWERS recommends using "location relative to the airport" when making traffic advisory calls. Either get it published, or don't use it.
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
I don't like it when folks use unofficial reporting points at nontowered airports -- leads to too much confusion for nonlocals (or even locals not familiar with them). I remember one time at Leesburg VA (JYO) when folks were calling entering the pattern from "the water tower," and seeing three water towers in the vicinity of the pattern entry area far enough apart that it mattered. That's probably why AC 90-42F TRAFFIC ADVISORY PRACTICES AT AIRPORTS WITHOUT OPERATING CONTROL TOWERS recommends using "location relative to the airport" when making traffic advisory calls. Either get it published, or don't use it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I was going to cite a water tower example myself, or even a quarry. We have at least two quarries within 5 miles of my airport.
 
Ron Levy said:
I don't like it when folks use unofficial reporting points at nontowered airports -- leads to too much confusion for nonlocals (or even locals not familiar with them). I remember one time at Leesburg VA (JYO) when folks were calling entering the pattern from "the water tower," and seeing three water towers in the vicinity of the pattern entry area far enough apart that it mattered. That's probably why AC 90-42F TRAFFIC ADVISORY PRACTICES AT AIRPORTS WITHOUT OPERATING CONTROL TOWERS recommends using "location relative to the airport" when making traffic advisory calls. Either get it published, or don't use it.
Click to expand...

I hate hearing these, and who has time to stare back down at their lap in the airport environment to find a reporting point anyway? The few times I ever use them I keep them short using both as in "Tiger 630 over Asarco 10 east 5500 inbound landing <airfield>"
 
I like to kill two birds with one stone "80A is 5 to the northwest over the 3M plant..."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top