How to Use a Flight Simulator to Log Training Time and Save Money

Thankfully, a few years went by, and I had opportunities to get a better idea of what flying actually entailed.

A family friend who ran a flight school took me for my first flight while I was still preschool age, and my later experiences in Boy Scouts gave me the chance to ride along in a Piper Cub while earning an aviation merit badge. Since one of the requirements was to make a flight plan, my parents bought me Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004 (MSFS2004) so I could execute it. 

MSFS2004 would become a mainstay of my teenage years and, though rudimentary by today’s standards, I believe it provided me with tools that would make the early days of my real-world flight training smoother than they might have otherwise been. 

In my conversations with students and fellow pilots, I’ve found that flight simulators are a common hook that brought many of us into aviation. But what role, if any, do flight simulators have in the formal flight school environment? 

It should be noted from the start that even basic home flight simulator setups are good—like, really good. 

Home flight sims, especially when paired with controls and avionics that mirror what a pilot normally flies with, can be helpful tools for getting additional practice with tricky maneuvers and, while not replacements for the real thing, can still be incredibly useful aids in the quest for ongoing proficiency. 

But where, exactly, does that leave things for flight schools? Are simulators best viewed as useful but extracurricular tools? Or should they be actively incorporated into students’ programs of study, and if so, how? 

To appropriately answer that question, we need to get a bit more specific about how different sorts of GA-focused flight simulator products are categorized by the FAA, and then dive into how each category can be best applied as a training tool for students. 

First, we have basic flight sim software, like Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024 (MS2024) or X-Plane 12 (XP12), for example. These are just pieces of software and, technically (though it would probably be no fun), could be flown just using a mouse and keyboard. On their own, and especially when paired with good hardware, they are fantastic tools for practice and proficiency. Still, as far as the FAA is concerned, they are legally no different than any other computer game. 

That said, the FAA still does concern itself with home simulator setups, and just because software itself does not legally count toward training does not mean there are no options that do. This is where we get into Aviation Training Devices (ATDs). 

These come in two main flavors; Basic Aviation Training Devices (BATD) and Advanced Aviation Training Devices (AATD). According to FAA guidance, a BATD is a device that gives its users an “adequate training platform” for instruction toward a Private Pilot Certificate (PPL) and instrument rating, inclusive of procedural tasks and operational tasks specific to meeting the requirements laid out in 14 CFR parts 61 and 141. 

An AATD, meanwhile, should go beyond what is offered by a BATD and should also be capable of providing training toward Commercial Pilot (CPL), Airline Transport Pilot (ATP), and Flight Instructor (CFI) certificates in accordance with parts 61 and 141. 

When a device meeting these and a few additional requirements is approved for use by the FAA, they will receive a letter of authorization (LOA), to be readily displayed alongside the device’s qualification and approval guide (QAG). These must be displayed in such a way so as to be accessible by students, pilots, and instructors who intend to use the device for training or for logging certain experiences. 

So we know we can use a simulator—or more appropriately, a BATD or AATD—for flight training, but what specifically can we use it for, and how do we log the training?

As any good pilot should know, the answers can be found in the regulations. 

According to 14 CFR 61.109(k)(1), students working toward their PPL may log 2.5 hours of training from an authorized instructor in a flight training device representative of an aircraft appropriate to the certificate sought. This can usually be met using a BATD or AATD.

Perhaps the tune of 2.5 hours sounds underwhelming, but remember that the minimum total hour requirements under Part 61 comes to 40 hours. Few students actually reach their check ride in 40 hours. The number of hours each student needs is a personal thing, but plan on going into training expecting to log at least another 10-15 hours more at a minimum. 

Remember also that, while students can only log 2.5 hours of “sim time,” they are, of course, free to spend as much time with an instructor in a training device as they might need. While time spent with an instructor beyond 2.5 hours may not count for logging time, the experiences gained are relevant and can reduce how much training time a student needs to spend in the skies. That still saves students time and money.

All of this translates into a couple of things for student pilots. On the one hand, while they can log 2.5 hours in an AATD or BATD, those 2.5 hours probably won’t make a huge difference in meeting the minimum hour requirements. On the face of it, this isn’t great news. 

On the other hand, though, there’s a reason students can log any time in these devices at all. There is genuine, demonstrated value in training with BATDs and AATDs. While it may not be likely that using one will reduce the minimum flight time requirements students will spend in the sky, they are fantastic platforms on which to introduce and practice challenging concepts. The ability to do this on the ground usually does translate into cost savings for students and a more efficient training timeline. 

For example, I have found training devices helpful when introducing students to challenging concepts like VOR navigation. Using VOR receivers is notoriously difficult to adequately explain and learn outside the cockpit, and since it can take a bit of time for many students to master, these tend to amount to expensive hands-on lessons. Introducing, or otherwise revisiting, challenging lessons like this in an ATD helps students reduce their costs, even while flight schools enjoy a new source of high-profit revenue in the form of device rental.

Using a training device for private-level instruction is a great idea, but instrument training is the stuff BATDs and, especially, AATDs are made for.

Going back to the regs, 61.65(i) tells us that students can log up to 10 hours of instrument time received in a BATD, or up to 20 hours of instrument time received in an AATD. Be careful to note that this time must be received from an authorized instructor, so while students can certainly practice on their own, they can only log the time if an instructor’s signature accompanies the entry. 

Not only does logging up to 20 hours of instrument time towards an instrument rating present a huge cost-saving opportunity for students, it also provides much more condensed and targeted training than actual flight typically can. Instructors can set up students on a wider variety of approaches across a vastly larger geography than is otherwise possible, but students won’t need to waste any time transiting between approaches or resetting to fly an approach for a second or third time. Additionally, instructors can pause a procedure at any time to offer real-time feedback normally reserved for the debrief, helping students get and apply much more precise feedback.

By beginning instrument training with a BATD or AATD, students can save thousands of dollars while getting a good grasp on how to properly fly instrument procedures well before executing them in a real airplane. Going about it this way makes things such that, by the time students practice instrument skills in the real world, they can focus more on practicing and solidifying what they have already learned, rather than trying to figure things out with the instructor on the fly.

As in private and instrument training, students can log time toward their commercial certificate using certain devices. At this stage, BATDs are out, but AATDs can be used so long as such use is stated on the device’s LOA which, again, must be available to students and instructors for viewing. 

In most cases, this means students in Part 61 programs of study can apply up to 50 hours of simulated training with an instructor in an AATD towards their total aeronautical experience. Thus, one could earn the commercial certificate with 200 hours of flight time and 50 hours of simulated time. Those in Part 141 programs should check the LOA of the device they wish to use, which will specify what percentage of their aeronautical experience can be logged with an instructor in a simulator. Again, just don’t forget that all of this time must be completed with an instructor, not by yourself.

Various simulators and training devices, ranging from Microsoft Flight Simulator to full-motion simulators serve many purposes beyond the scope of logging training time, of course. Especially with good hardware upgrades, even home flight simulators are useful tools for students looking to practice skills, particularly during instrument training. They can serve as an additional tool in the instructor or flight school’s toolbelt as well for assigning homework for students to practice before the next lesson, perhaps paired with a relevant online training module.

Whatever the use, simulators are not simply for home enthusiasts, nor are they reserved for the world of expensive jet-type ratings. AATDs and BATDs have a strong place in the flight school environment, the benefits of which are plentiful for owners, instructors, and students alike.