Why home flight sims help – and where they absolutely don’t

Walk into any flying club today and you will find at least a few students who have more hours in Microsoft Flight Simulator or X-Plane than in a real cockpit. That is not a bad thing. Used well, home simulators are powerful tools for procedural learning. Used badly, they create exactly the kind of brittle habits and false confidence that make instructors nervous.

This piece is about that line.

What home sims are actually good at

Modern sims are extraordinary at one thing: repeatable procedures at a fraction of the cost.

In Microsoft Flight Simulator and X-Plane, you can fly the same departure ten times in a row, pause at will, rewind a botched approach, and practice flows until they are boring. That is where they shine for a real‑world pilot or student:

Checklists and flows. Power‑up, before‑start, after‑start, run‑up, pre‑takeoff, cruise, pre‑landing. You can sit at your desk and rehearse each checklist until it is second nature. The muscle memory of “what comes next” transfers surprisingly well into the cockpit.
Buttonology and avionics. Navigating a G1000, setting up a GPS approach, loading and activating procedures, managing radios, understanding autopilot modes – these are all cognitive tasks that do not require real‑world G‑forces to learn. A sim lets you make your avionics mistakes cheaply, at 1x or 0.5x speed.
Basic instrument scan and situational awareness. Even for a VFR pilot, the habit of glancing between airspeed, attitude, altitude, and outside references benefits from repetition. In a sim, you can fly headings and altitudes, practice climbs and descents, and see how the picture on your screen responds.
Mental models of airspace and navigation. Modern scenery and nav data mean you can rehearse routes, visualize airspace boundaries, and think about “where am I now?” in a way that feeds directly into flight planning and radio work.

In other words: home sims are excellent procedural trainers and mental rehearsal environments. They help your brain build a scaffold of “what to do” so your limited real‑world hours can focus on “how it actually feels”.

The big gap: a simulator can’t teach you feel

The problem starts when a sim is treated as a complete training environment rather than a narrow tool.

💡

A PC, monitor, and spring‑loaded yoke can simulate control positions and instrument outcomes. They cannot simulate control forces, inertia, or the seat‑of‑the‑pants feel that matters so much in general aviation and recreational flying.

Some of the missing pieces:

Control forces and trim. In a real aircraft, the yoke talks back. You feel when you are out of trim, when you are loading the wings in a steep turn, when you are pulling too hard in the flare. Most consumer setups give you the same spring force at all times. You can learn to “hold a picture” on the screen while learning the wrong relationship between pressure, attitude, and outcome.
Inertia and energy management. A real Cessna or light sport aircraft does not change pitch or bank instantaneously. You feel the lag, the need to anticipate, the way a ballooning flare or a sloppy base‑to‑final turn feels in your body. A desktop sim can model this visually, but without the kinesthetic cues, it is easy to over‑control or “chase the instruments”.
Turbulence, bumps, and noise. Light aircraft are noisy, shaky, and alive. The first time many sim‑primed students hit real thermals, crosswinds, or mechanical turbulence, they are surprised by how much the airplane moves. That surprise matters: your first experience of “this feels wrong” is better done with an instructor than in solo mental space built on calm sim air.
Peripheral vision and real‑world sight picture. Even with ultra‑wide monitors or VR, your peripheral vision, depth perception, and real‑world horizon cues are different. That matters on takeoff rotation, in the flare, and during low‑level maneuvering. It is very easy to build a sim‑specific “sight picture” that does not map neatly onto an RPC or PPL trainer.

This is why so many instructors and experienced pilots warn that home sims are terrible tutors for learning feel. They are silent on the most important feedback channel you have in a light aircraft: your inner ear, your backside, and your hands.

The bad habits sims quietly teach

None of this means a sim is harmful by default. It becomes harmful when it is your only source of “flying experience”, and when you let it shape habits without a real‑world reference point.

Common traps:

Panel fixation. In a sim, it is natural to stare at the panel. The monitor is literally a framed picture of instruments. Outside references are often less compelling than the beautifully rendered PFD. That can train exactly the opposite of what your instructor wants on VFR lessons: eyes outside, quick scan inside, back outside again.
Rough handling and over‑controlling. A spring‑loaded joystick encourages big, fast inputs. You do not feel the extra G‑loading, the buffet before the stall, or the sloppiness in a turn. You just see the horizon move. Students can arrive in the real cockpit used to “stirring” the controls instead of making small, deliberate pressures.
Unrealistic risk tolerance. Engine failures, bad weather, tight scud‑running – in a sim, all of these are turn‑off‑and‑restart events. There is no visceral cost to poor decision making. Without guidance, that can normalize behaviors that are completely unacceptable in the real world.
Over‑confidence about “hours”. It is common to see questions like “Is MSFS 2024 a good way to prepare for a PPL?” from sim pilots who have turned off all the in‑game assistance and are wondering if it now counts as “realistic”. The danger is subtle: they may be very sharp on procedures and avionics, yet still at square one in terms of basic handling, radio work under pressure, or working with an instructor in a noisy, moving cockpit.

The pattern here is consistent with what flight instructors and training guides highlight: home sims help with the mental game and the button‑pushing, but they can quietly erode stick‑and‑rudder discipline if used in isolation.

How to use sims as a real training aid, not a substitute

💡

The most productive way to think about Microsoft Flight Simulator or X‑Plane is as a supplement chosen by your real‑world training, not the other way around.

A few practical principles:

Let your instructor set the scope. Use your lesson briefs and debriefs to decide what to practice at home. If you have just done circuits, rehearse checklists, calls, and patterns in the sim. Do not go inventing your own acrobatic syllabus because the add‑on aircraft looks fun.
Mirror real‑world procedures brutally. Fly the same checklists, the same flows, the same callouts you use in the aircraft. Do not let the sim tempt you into cutting corners “because it’s just a game”.
Treat sims as chair flying with moving pictures. Think of it as an advanced form of chair flying: a place to rehearse what your hands and brain will do, not how the airplane feels. When the real airplane contradicts your sim experience, the airplane wins.
Invest (a bit) in controls, but know their limits. A yoke, throttle quadrant, and rudder pedals make procedural practice more natural and reduce some bad habits, but they still do not reproduce real control forces. Treat them as better input devices, not as replicas of the aircraft.
Be honest about confidence vs competence. If you feel very “ahead of the airplane” in the sim, take that as a sign that you have good procedural scaffolding. Then reset your expectations in the real cockpit. Assume you will still need to learn how that scaffolding fits with noise, vibration, radio calls, and a human sitting beside you.

For recreational and GA pilots, feel is the point

In airline and advanced IFR training, a lot of the value is indeed procedural and systems‑based. For recreational and general aviation flying, the joy and safety margin come from feel: learning how your particular aircraft talks to you in bumps, in slow flight, in crosswinds, in a ballooned flare.

A desktop simulator cannot teach you that. It can, at best, get the checklists, flows, and mental models out of the way so that your real‑world hours can be spent on the thing that truly matters: building an honest relationship with the aircraft, in real air, with a real instructor.

Used like that, Microsoft Flight Simulator and X‑Plane are not just harmless. They are genuinely helpful. Used as your only “flight school”, they are convincing liars.

The sim is a great place to learn what to do. The airplane is the only place you will learn what it feels like.