As to airspace, JodelDavo, it would be interesting to discuss what factors actually contribute to infringements as opposed to frustrates pilots.
It frustrates pilot navigating along the south coast around the I of W, it frustrates pilot transitting through the Manchester zone, Southend was / is becoming a frustration, and as if of course the SE bottleneck (Gatwick, Heathrow). These are all enormous blocks of airspace which are also complicated and make VRF routing especially difficult and requiring great care. Often there is no support from ATC due to controller workload.
However, frustration is one thing. My own view is that it is very difficult to effectively redesign this airspace and the problems stem far more from the sheer density of commercial airports in these areas. Doubtless the airpsace could be tinkered with, but would this be meaningful?
I suspect many pilots these days dont get frustrated by transits. With a few exceptions ATC has become a lot better at accomodating these.
The infringement problem is that pilots attempt to navigate these bigs tracks of airspace and get caught out. They get caught out because bases drop sometimes in unexpected places, they dont plan their descents early enough, they wander a bit when VFR bimbling and suddenly find themselves at 2,700 when a mile to the south the base of CAS was 3,500, they get caught out by distractions (weather, other aircraft), they attempt to navigate visually (and I take your point, but you had still better be very good doing this even if the airspace was constructed around better features in the complex airspace of the south east for example) and various othere reasons, including really poor pilot craft sometimes.
These are the real reasons behind infringements I think. With good planning, a moving map that you really know how to use, almost certainly a reasonable level of currency, and unrelenting discipline (I think the days of ad hoc VFR bimbling in some of these areas, where you set off with no particular plan is asking for trouble for all but the most experienced) they can mostly be avoided.
However I know of very experienced instructors, really high hours instrument pilots and others who have ended up at GASCo. On the whole these are all very short incursions, that are quickly corrected, but of course no longer go unreported nor, it would seem, are undeserving of a trip to GASCo.
If we knew exactly where all the infringements are occuring, then we might have a better idea of some of the reasons to the extent these could be related to airspace, but I still dont think we do.
As ever, we need to identify the real problem first. Why do most infringements occur? We can then address what system changes might help, but I suspect arguing for a redesign or air space is just far to simplistic.
My interest has been the response after an infringment occurs and so we also need to decide whether the response to an infringement is appropriate because you can bet they will still occur whatever redesign takes place. For example, they occur in the States and many would argue their airspace is far better organised than ours, AND their ATC support of GA is way better. I have argued our response is not helpful and set out earlier why, and how it could be improved. Improvement at this end also helps because surely the key is also to educate pilots, both pilots who have infringed, but also everyone of us who sees an instructor, from time to time for whatever reason.
I fly with an instructor every year (you are required to with a multi rating / instrument) and this is a very good opportunity to review CAS, and how best to avoid infringements. Yet the better the instructor is versed in the importance of this aspect of piloting these days, and the current techniques to secure success, it may well not get covered as well as it could.
It seems ot me we bicker amoung ourselves, and all the vested interests surface (it is amazing how many on here are NATS, or CAA, or GASCo, or AOPA, - I never realised and wasnt especially bothered, until I was told who is who). It still doesnt really bother me, but I think it is a shame if (and perhaps they dont) vested interest get in the way of an honest debate of how we make this right. I dont care who is who, but I wish we focused on the arguments rather than toys out because someone thinks you are having a go at their pet organisation).