Narrative:

We requested the RNAV 26 approach. We were cleared direct heded; a waypoint with which we were not familiar. Flight conditions were a broken cloud deck at our altitude with moderate chop; good VFR conditions below. [The aircraft was] equipped with an avidyne entegra flight deck and two garmin gtn 650 touch screen navigators. We displayed the RNAV 26 approach on the mfd and it did not display heded nor was heded on the paper en route charts. We manually entered heded as the active waypoint. The mfd showed that we had just passed heded and we requested further instructions. However; the controller advised that we were still approximately 10 miles to the north of heded and we advised that the mfd was clearly showing that we had passed heded. We advised the controller and circled around in a right turn to intercept heded and the controller inquired as to our intentions. We explained the discrepancy between the controller's report of our position and the mfd clear depiction of heded almost at our then present position. The huge discrepancy caused us to be confused and in order to avoid a possibly dangerous situation we cancelled the RNAV 26 approach and requested a visual approach to lns which was completed without problems. Once safely on the ground; we realized that heded had been entered as a user waypoint at our present position at the time of entry and that when the mfd displayed the approach chart; it had started up in a zoom configuration so that heded was off screen and not visible. The only depiction we had regarding the location of heded showed heded 10 miles to the north northeast of its actual position. We're not sure how heded was entered as a user waypoint (perhaps; in the turbulence; and the difficulty in using a touch screen that we accidentally created a user waypoint). However; the displayed misinformation confused two experienced instrument pilots. We feel that the data entry error coupled with the mfd approach chart depiction starting in a zoomed view rather than a standard view (so that the correct information which would have been at the extreme edge of the display was never presented) created a dangerous situation. The GPS navigator should never have accepted a user waypoint with the same spelling as a published designated waypoint. There were no [traffic] conflicts involved.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: After discovering a large discrepancy between the GPS and the Controller's location of a fix; the pilots of an experimental aircraft cancelled the RNAV approach and flew a visual approach. Pilots later determined that they had accidentally entered the fix as a user waypoint at their current location.

Narrative: We requested the RNAV 26 approach. We were cleared direct HEDED; a waypoint with which we were not familiar. Flight conditions were a broken cloud deck at our altitude with moderate chop; good VFR conditions below. [The aircraft was] equipped with an Avidyne Entegra flight deck and two Garmin GTN 650 touch screen navigators. We displayed the RNAV 26 approach on the MFD and it did not display HEDED nor was HEDED on the paper en route charts. We manually entered HEDED as the active waypoint. The MFD showed that we had just passed HEDED and we requested further instructions. However; the Controller advised that we were still approximately 10 miles to the north of HEDED and we advised that the MFD was clearly showing that we had passed HEDED. We advised the Controller and circled around in a right turn to intercept HEDED and the Controller inquired as to our intentions. We explained the discrepancy between the Controller's report of our position and the MFD clear depiction of HEDED almost at our then present position. The huge discrepancy caused us to be confused and in order to avoid a possibly dangerous situation we cancelled the RNAV 26 approach and requested a visual approach to LNS which was completed without problems. Once safely on the ground; we realized that HEDED had been entered as a user waypoint at our present position at the time of entry and that when the MFD displayed the approach chart; it had started up in a zoom configuration so that HEDED was off screen and not visible. The only depiction we had regarding the location of HEDED showed HEDED 10 miles to the north northeast of its actual position. We're not sure how HEDED was entered as a user waypoint (perhaps; in the turbulence; and the difficulty in using a touch screen that we accidentally created a user waypoint). However; the displayed misinformation confused two experienced instrument pilots. We feel that the data entry error coupled with the MFD approach chart depiction starting in a zoomed view rather than a standard view (so that the correct information which would have been at the extreme edge of the display was never presented) created a dangerous situation. The GPS navigator should never have accepted a user waypoint with the same spelling as a published designated waypoint. There were no [traffic] conflicts involved.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.