Questionnaire for current airline pilots

"(Answer required)" indicates required fields

Step 1 of 8

12%

URL

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The Air and Space Academy (Académie de l’Air et de l’Espace) proposes to survey airline pilots in order to identify the domains and flight phases where new technical developments or aids could improve flight safety within the framework of the current crew composition.

Responses will be anonymized and summarized in a report published as an AAE Dossier, accessible to all, in French and English. From Section 3 onwards, your responses to all questions are not mandatory if the topic does not raise your interest. Partial responses will be taken into account.

When you submit this form, it does not automatically collect your details, such as name and email address, unless you provide them yourself.

You can interrupt and then resume the questionnaire by using the gray box "Save and continue completing the form later" at the bottom of the page.

Please respond by June 30, 2026.

PS: thank you for ensuring a wide distribution of this questionnaire by forwarding the link to other pilots.

Section 1 - General information

1.1 - Name (optional)

First Last

1.2 - E-mail (optional)

Enter Email Confirm Email

You are(Answer required)

Airline pilot

Air traffic controllers, ground staff

1.3 - Company (optional)

1.4 - Current aircraft type(Answer required)

1.5 - Network operated(Answer required)

Short- or medium-haul

Long-haul

Section 2 – Initial open-ended question

2.1 – What are the technical improvements, including automation, that you would like to see implemented as a priority?(Answer required)

This first question is an open-ended one in which we would like to hear about the one, two, or three improvements that, based on your day-to-day experience, you feel are most urgent to implement.

Section 3 - Airport operations

Evaluate the importance of each improvement: 1 = potentially dangerous 2 = disruptive 3 = of no interest 4 = desirable 5 = essential. Note: you may choose not to answer and move to the next question if the question does not elicit an opinion from you.

3.1 – In addition to the taxi chart, does a Moving Map on EFB or ND seem useful to you?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2

For example, would you prefer a Moving Map on the EFB or the ND?

3.2 – In the event of receiving taxi clearances by data link, would it be useful to be able to display the route on a screen?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2

For example, would it be desirable to be able to automatically transfer the datalink message into a trace on the chart or the moving map?

3.3 – Should other traffic (on the ground, on approach, at takeoff) be visualized on the electronic airport chart/moving map (using ADS-B)?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2

For example, should there be the possibility to "declutter" by limiting it to nearby or conflicting traffic?

3.4 – Are you in favor of using ROAAS (Runway Overrun Awareness and Alerting System) and Brake to Vacate (braking optimization system)?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2

For example, if you have already used these systems, do you see any possible improvements?

3.5 – Are you in favor of an on-board alerting system to detect runway collision risks (ADS-B IN), including aircraft on the runway or aircraft on final approach?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2

For example: how to visualize conflicting aircraft and trigger alarms?

3.6 – What do you think of wingtip cameras or synthetic views like "drone-views" to prevent collisions while taxiing?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2

For example: should taxi cameras generate "drone-view" type synthetic images, using several cameras and sensors?

3.7 – What do you think of ground systems like RWSL (Runway Status Lights) to limit runway incursions?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

For example: Should the system account for an aircraft on final approach by displaying Runway Entrance Lights (RELs) for the aircraft about to line up, or Takeoff Hold Lights (THLs) if the runway is occupied? Could there be an equivalent to RWSL that would be displayed in the cockpit without the need for ground lights?

3.8 – Which of the proposals below would you like to see implemented as a priority?

Moving Map on EFB or ND

Taxi clearances received by data link, displaying the route on a screen

Visualization of other traffic (on the ground, on approach, at takeoff) on the electronic airport chart/moving map (using ADS-B)

Use of ROAAS (Runway Overrun Awareness and Alerting System) and Brake to Vacate systems

On-board warning system to detect the risk of runway collisions (ADS-B IN), including aircraft on runway or on final

Wing-tip cameras or drone-type synthetic views to avoid collisions while taxiing

RWSL (Runway Status Lights) ground systems to limit runway incursions

Other suggestion - Airport operations

Please detail any other idea or need regarding airport operations.

Section 4 – Prevention of airborne collisions

Evaluate each proposal from 1 to 5 and use the free text box to explain your choice if you wish. 1 = potentially dangerous, 2 = disruptive, 3 = no interrest, 4 = desirable, 5 = essential

4.1 – Are you in favor of making AP/FD TCAS automatic mode the standard?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

For example: if you already have experience with this system, what improvement would seem useful to you?

4.2 - What do you think of the advanced ADS B functions: sequencing and merging (example. automatically maintaining separation from preceding traffic on the same route)?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

For example, would such a system seem useful and safe to you for automatically sequencing aircraft on final one behind the other?

4.3 – What do you think of using ADS-B IN to improve situational awareness (identification, velocity vectors, clearances)?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

For example, should there be a possibility to "declutter" by limiting it to nearby or conflicting traffic and zoom in on a traffic to display clearance elements such as altitude clearance (ADS-B parameter)?

4.4 – Which of the proposals above would you like to see implemented as a priority?

AP/FD TCAS automatic mode now generally available

Advanced ADS-B functions: sequencing and merging

Use ADS-B IN to improve situational awareness (identification, speed vectors, clearances, etc.).

Other suggestions - Preventing mid-air collisions.

Please detail any other idea or need regarding the prevention of airborne collisions.

Section 5 – Prevention of CFIT (Controlled Flight Into Terrain)

Evaluate each proposal from 1 to 5 and use the free text box to explain your choice if you wish. 1 = potentially dangerous, 2 = disruptive, 3 = no interrest, 4 = desirable, 5 = essential

5.1 – Would the display of the vertical profile (terrain on ND, Pop-Up) improve terrain situational awareness?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

For example, should the vertical profile be made more readable with an eventual "pop-up" in case of a critical trajectory in the medium term? Should the Terrain on ND display show critical points (obstacles or terrain that could interfere with the trajectory) overlaid on the radar image (symbology to be defined)?

5.2 – Should TAWS (Terrain Awareness Warning System, formerly GPWS) evolve towards a 3D avoidance trajectory?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

For example, how to provide guidance instructions for a 3D avoidance trajectory with a horizontal component?

5.3 – Would you find it useful to have a pre-warning indicating the distance to the TAWS alert in order to avoid a high-incidence pull-up maneuver?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

For example, how to display this pre-alert only when appropriate?

Do you think it is necessary to implement an automated QNH validation system using other sensors (radiosonde, TAWS/GPS altitude, etc.) in parallel with standard operating procedures?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment (optional)

For example, how could the radio altimeter or TAWS-determined altitude (close to GPS altitude) be used? Can GNSS altitude itself be a victim of "jamming or spoofing"?

5.5 – Which of the proposals above would you like to see implemented as a priority?

Display vertical cross-section (terrain on ND, PopUp) to improve situational awareness?

Evolution of TAWS (Terrain Awareness Warning System, formerly GPWS), towards a 3D avoidance trajectory

A pre-warning indicating the distance to the TAWS alert to avoid a PULL UP maneuver

Automatic QNH validation using other sensors (radio probe, TAWS/GPS altitude, etc.) in parallel with operational procedures

Other suggestion - Preventing CFIT (collision with terrain)

Please detail any other idea or need regarding the prevention of collisions with terrain.

Section 6 - Weather Radar

Evaluate each proposal from 1 to 5 and use the free text box to explain your choice if you wish. 1 = potentially dangerous, 2 = disruptive, 3 = no interrest, 4 = desirable, 5 = essential

6.1 – Do you think it is necessary to improve the information provided by weather radars, notably the generalization of the vertical cut?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

For example, could you rank the following suggestions by order of importance: elimination of ground echoes, further reliability of predictive Wind Shear alarms, vertical cut, alert generation, more precise detection of danger zones, use of AI for raw image analysis and detection of cells with very high activity: e.g., hook-shaped echoes or heavy precipitation masking the background.

6.2 – In the case of next-generation radar systems, do you think it would be useful to develop a feature suggesting flight paths to avoid areas of strong convection?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

6.3 – Would an on-board automatic clear air turbulence detection system that provides one minute’s advance warning help avoid damage in the cabin?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

What is the minimum notice period that would seem operationally effective to you (in medium-haul, in long-haul)?

6.4 - Collaborative weather: should we set up a protocol (IATA/OACI?) for the automatic transmission in real time to the ground of turbulence and weather data from aircraft in flight (+ forwarding of this information merged with data from weather centers to other aircraft in the area)?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

For example, should we extend the practice of alerting other aircraft approaching an area already reported as turbulent by an earlier aircraft (a system already in place at Delta)? How should this information be displayed on the ND? How long does turbulence typically persist in the same location? Could this data be used to feed a “digital weather cloud” (a 3D representation of weather conditions)?

6.5 – Which of the proposals above would you like to see implemented as a priority?

Improvements to the information provided by weather radars, in particular the generalization of vertical cross-sections

Develop suggested trajectories for new-generation radars to avoid areas of high convection

On-board automatic clear-sky turbulence detection system providing one-minute advance warning to avoid cabin damage

Implementation of a protocol (IATA/OACI?) for automatic real-time transmission to the ground of turbulence and weather data from aircraft in flight (+ forwarding of this information, merged with data from weather centers, to other aircraft in the area).

Other suggestion - Weather Radar (optional)

Please detail any other idea or need regarding the weather radar.

Section 7 - Help with failure management

Evaluate each proposal from 1 to 5 and use the free text box to explain your choice if you wish. 1 = potentially dangerous, 2 = disruptive, 3 = no interrest, 4 = desirable, 5 = essential

7.1 – Should automatic emergency descent be generalized (example: A350*) – improvements / risks?*

*Automatic activation of the autopilot descent procedure in the event of a loss of cabin pressure and if the crew does not respond within a certain time frame.

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

How can the process be improved, and what risks do you foresee?

7.2 – Is it necessary to develop a function for the management of certain emergencies (e.g., LAND ASAP, LAND ANSA) that includes proposed solutions (e.g., possible diversion airfields with operational information)?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

For example, should the function propose, in real time, depending on the nature of the emergency, possible diversion airfields ranked according to safety criteria (flight time, fuel on arrival, weather, runway condition, etc.) and operational criteria (hosting capacities, re-routing options, technical assistance, etc.)?

7.3 – Do you think it is necessary to develop a system to assist in managing complex failures using artificial intelligence to intelligently synthesize multiple checklists, prioritize actions, and assess remaining resources?1 – potentially dangerous

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

For example, would you trust a so-called “smart” AI-powered fault management system that replaces existing checklists, or should it be limited to providing suggestions? Could AI help summarize remaining aircraft capabilities (e.g., the Qantas A380 incident in Singapore)?

7.4 – Which of the proposals above would you like to see implemented as a priority?

Generalize automatic emergency descent (A350 example) - improvements / risks.

Need to develop a function to manage certain emergencies (e.g. LAND ASAP, LAND ANSA) with proposed solutions (e.g. possible diversion sites with operational information).

Develop a complex breakdown management system using Artificial Intelligence to intelligently synthesize multiple checklists, prioritize actions and assess resources.

Other suggestion - Help with failure management

Please detail any other idea or need regarding help with failure management.

Section 8 - Communications

Evaluate each proposal from 1 to 5 and use the free text box to explain your choice if you wish. 1 = potentially dangerous, 2 = disruptive, 3 = no interrest, 4 = desirable, 5 = essential

8.1 – Should D-ATIS (received by Datalink) and the automatic transfer of ATIS data (e.g., QNH) into the FMS be generalized?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

For example, would it be useful to be able to automatically load ATIS data into aircraft systems, with QNH as the priority?

8.2 – What do you think of a text-based communication system (SMS type) between the cockpit and the cabin?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

For example, should the "cabin ready" interface offer the possibility of other bidirectional text messages between the cabin and the cockpit? On which interface? Do you think this would avoid intrusive calls and allow for more discretion (in case of a security problem, cabin-cockpit communications could be more discrete).

8.3 – What do you think of the possibility of easily transferring data link clearances to the relevant systems?

For example, pre-display of frequencies received by datalink on the VHF, altitude clearances or DIR TOs in the FMS, prior to validation by the pilot (Execute function).

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

8.4 – CPDLC: Do you think it would be beneficial (to improve information sharing) to give pilots the option of having messages read aloud via a synthetic voice?1 – potentially dangerous

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

Would that help, for example, to avoid misinterpretations?

8.5 -Should it be made easier to take NOTAMs and SIGMETs into account (use of AI for relevant sorting, graphic visualization, modern word processing, etc.)?

1 - potentially dangerous

2 - disruptive

3 - no interest

4 - desirable

5 - essential

Comment, especially if you answered 1 or 2.

For example, sorting of flight-relevant information by AI and modern presentation with possibility of graphics? Possibility of sorting by order of importance or subject (e.g. extract a query like "Is there a particular limitation in Keflavik today at the time of our passage?"

8.6 – Which of the proposals above would you like to see implemented as a priority?

Generalization of D-ATIS (received by ACARS) and automatic transfer of ATIS (ex QNH) data to the FMS?

SMS-type text communication between cockpit and cabin

Possibility of easily transferring data link clearances (Altitude, DIR TO, frequency, etc.) to aircraft systems?

CPDLC: do you think it's a good idea to offer pilots the option of having messages read out by synthetic voice?

Modernization of NOTAMs and SIGMETs (use of AI, relevant sorting, graphic visualization)

Other suggestion - Communications

Please detail any other ideas or requirements regarding communications

Invite others to answer this questionnaire by using the share buttons below.

(Your answers are not shared and remain confidential)

Partager le questionnaire