I just saw a thread in Reddit where MSFS 2024 is being used as a tool to teach private pilot students:

Is this becoming more common, that MSFS is being used in flight school as a tool to teach students?

I read that people were using MSFS 2020 for seaplane training from the geographical visuals that matched real life, but it's interesting to see MSFS 2024 being used as a tool at some flight schools now.

Edited June 10, 2025Jun 10 by abrams_tank

MSFS has been used to familiarize student pilots with basic aircraft systems for over 20 years.  This is nothing new.  

But it doesn't count towards flying hours, and it doesn't help type rated pilots for specific flight training.

1 minute ago, GoranM said:

MSFS has been used to familiarize student pilots with basic aircraft systems for over 20 years.  This is nothing new.  

But it doesn't count towards flying hours, and it doesn't help type rated pilots for specific flight training.

So does P3D and XP. I don't see the point of this  thread? 

11 minutes ago, Bobsk8 said:

So does P3D and XP. I don't see the point of this  thread? 

I haven't been to pilot school before, so I don't know what tools they use for training. I don't know how often MSFS is used for training either.  Maybe even FSX is stil being used?

And aside from that Reddit comment, I also don't know how often MSFS is used for seaplane training.

But there are a lot of real life pilots in this forum, and some CFIs too. Maybe they can shed some light on how often MSFS is being used (that is, MSFS 2020 and MSFS 2024).

Edited June 10, 2025Jun 10 by abrams_tank

Even back in the FS9/FSX days it was used, e.g. for teaching VOR navigation without needing to actually sit in the plane and do it. 

57 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

I haven't been to pilot school before, so I don't know what tools they use for training. I don't know how often MSFS is used for training either.  Maybe even FSX is stil being used?

And aside from that Reddit comment, I also don't know how often MSFS is used for seaplane training.

But there are a lot of real life pilots in this forum, and some CFIs too. Maybe they can shed some light on how often MSFS is being used (that is, MSFS 2020 and MSFS 2024).

Very interesting read. A PC-based flight simulator for training (teaching) depends on the regulatory authority (e.g., FAA, EASA, or ICAO) and the level of certification (e.g., FTD, FNPT, AATD, or FFS). The Basic Requirements for Aviation Training Devices (AATD & FTD) are quite restrictive, starting with Hardware & Controls, realistic flight controls (yoke/stick, rudder pedals, throttle), functional avionics, and appropriate instrumentation. Then we need an accurate flight dynamics model (validated for the aircraft type), realistic weather and environmental effects, 45 degrees horizontal field of view. Ability to set the weather required by the flight conditions and minimums. EASA is a bit relaxed on FNPT approval for FNPT I, but still...

Regardless of what people advocate for and wish to see, several issues prevent MSFS2020/2024 from being approved. Now, while people may do or claim this as a tool for teaching private pilots or students, we can arrive at a different conclusion based on the requirements. 

2 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

I haven't been to pilot school before, so I don't know what tools they use for training. I don't know how often MSFS is used for training either.  Maybe even FSX is stil being used?

And aside from that Reddit comment, I also don't know how often MSFS is used for seaplane training.

But there are a lot of real life pilots in this forum, and some CFIs too. Maybe they can shed some light on how often MSFS is being used (that is, MSFS 2020 and MSFS 2024).

I think the main thing to keep in mind is that using MSFS/OtherDesktopSim to demonstrate concepts of flight or switchology (esp as this particular picture seems to be a lecture setup) is a very good use case.

I could especially see MSFS being used to familiarize student pilots with pattern work, cross country route study, etc, etc.

As a visualizer, it's obviously an excellent multimedia demonstration system. And a lot more cost effective and flexible than a video/animation/PowerPoint.

BUT, as a few have already said, that's not the equivalent of (or even close to) an approved FTD.

Doesn't mean that day is too far off, it'll just boil down to whether somebody wants to go thru the trouble of jumping through the paperwork hoops, AND what level of FTD for which they're seeking approval.

 

1 hour ago, LRBS said:

Very interesting read. A PC-based flight simulator for training (teaching) depends on the regulatory authority (e.g., FAA, EASA, or ICAO) and the level of certification (e.g., FTD, FNPT, AATD, or FFS). The Basic Requirements for Aviation Training Devices (AATD & FTD) are quite restrictive, starting with Hardware & Controls, realistic flight controls (yoke/stick, rudder pedals, throttle), functional avionics, and appropriate instrumentation. Then we need an accurate flight dynamics model (validated for the aircraft type), realistic weather and environmental effects, 45 degrees horizontal field of view. Ability to set the weather required by the flight conditions and minimums. EASA is a bit relaxed on FNPT approval for FNPT I, but still...

 

Regardless of what people advocate for and wish to see, several issues prevent MSFS2020/2024 from being approved. Now, while people may do or claim this as a tool for teaching private pilots or students, we can arrive at a different conclusion based on the requirements. 

Realistic flight model is matter of interpretation. Since I used several FAA certified sims, in most of them flight dynamic was  at the best at the level of stock FSX and even worse. 

There are lot of things could be used in pilot training and sim not necessary has to be to be certified to be a training aid. The main question of certification is if one can log hours for certificate or currency! That where is  price tag come in play!

I may attest that FAA certified sim I used for currency, certification or training are only superior to MSFS in hardware and instructor panel. Realistic weather or environmental effect were almost laughable really.

45 degree horizontal field?  Welcome Elite PI-135 LOL

57 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

Realistic flight model is matter of interpretation. Since I used several FAA certified sims, in most of them flight dynamic was  at the best at the level of stock FSX and even worse. 

There are lot of things could be used in pilot training and sim not necessary has to be to be certified to be a training aid. The main question of certification is if one can log hours for certificate or currency! That where is  price tag come in play!

I may attest that FAA certified sim I used for currency, certification or training are only superior to MSFS in hardware and instructor panel. Realistic weather or environmental effect were almost laughable really.

45 degree horizontal field?  Welcome Elite PI-135 LOL

I agree, but it needs to be certified. To be very honest, even Level D simulators are NOT 100%, I would say if they are 85% in every aspect, it would be Christmas. Lately, I have spent probably 50% of my time flying the line and 50% in the sims. I can't comment on what kind of training you do, but at the airlines, our wx settings that can be simulated are pretty darn close, from 500, 500, 500 RVR, thunderstorms, fog banks moving very realistically over the rwy, 0, 0, 0, CAT III C landing environments, rain, drizzle, icing, windshear,  etc. What I can't understand is where " a lot of things could be used in pilot training and a sim does not necessarily have to be certified to be a training aid. ". 

As a silly example, one of our guys in the training department had a quick reference card (aid) for oceanic crossings and procedures for flying through the Middle and Far East. It was just a bloody four-page, pocket-sized booklet that needed approval. 

7 hours ago, abrams_tank said:

But there are a lot of real life pilots in this forum, and some CFIs too. Maybe they can shed some light on how often MSFS is being used (that is, MSFS 2020 and MSFS 2024).

Let me enlighten you on what CFI's and flying instructors have to say about flight simulators in general.  I used to hold a PPL, and I had 3 flight instructors in my road to a PPL.  My first meeting with a CFI, when I took my first introductory flight, during the briefing, the CFI asked me what do I know about aircraft in general.  I told him I was very familiar with aircraft through the Microsoft Flight Simulator platform.  This was in 1997, after using FS5 and FS98.  

He gave me a polite chuckle, insinuating that flight simulators can never replace actual flight.  

During the briefing, he told me, word for word, "Forget what you know about that flight sim."

Every instructor I had, basically repeated the CFI's words.  

The primary reasons CFI's would use any flight sim, at most, is teaching people about circuits, VOR's and NDB's, and how to read instruments.  Even Flight Gear can be used to teach student pilots about these things.

FAA certification is another level, and only one flight sim, with the correct hardware, is qualified for that.  

Flight sims are an entertainment platform used for a hobby.  There are some cases where an add on can be used for flight training to help a pilot stay fresh, but if I, or any person with common sense, came across a pilot on a commercial aircraft, who said he got his training from MSFS, I'd be looking for another airline or another pilot.

Edited June 11, 2025Jun 11 by GoranM

5 minutes ago, GoranM said:

Let me enlighten you on what CFI's have to say about flight simulators in general.  I used to hold a PPL, and my first meeting with a CFI, when I took my first introductory flight, during the briefing, the CFI asked me what do I know about aircraft in general.  I told him I was very familiar with aircraft through the Microsoft Flight Simulator platform.  This was in 1997, after using FS5 and FS98.  

He gave me a polite chuckle, insinuating that flight simulators can never replace actual flight.  

During the briefing, he told me, word for word, "Forget what you know about that flight sim."

I had the opposite experience when getting my PPL... my instructor routinely said I was more prepared than most of his students and I hit milestones like my solo and XC's faster as a result. I attribute much of that to all I learned in MSFS before my training along with using MSFS as a supplement during my training. Heck, I thank MSFS (this was 2004) for helping me easily spot one of the airports of my solo cross country, even with those outdated graphics! I regularly brought up my at-home "training" during debriefs and my instructor was all for it. I did Part 61 and finished in just above the minimum of 40 hours. I have no doubt that MSFS saved me thousands in training costs.

Any consumer flight sim is what you make of it. It can be a game or a powerful training tool (or both)!

33 minutes ago, GoranM said:

Let me enlighten you on what CFI's and flying instructors have to say about flight simulators in general.  I used to hold a PPL, and I had 3 flight instructors in my road to a PPL.  My first meeting with a CFI, when I took my first introductory flight, during the briefing, the CFI asked me what do I know about aircraft in general.  I told him I was very familiar with aircraft through the Microsoft Flight Simulator platform.  This was in 1997, after using FS5 and FS98.  

He gave me a polite chuckle, insinuating that flight simulators can never replace actual flight.  

During the briefing, he told me, word for word, "Forget what you know about that flight sim."

Every instructor I had, basically repeated the CFI's words.  

The primary reasons CFI's would use any flight sim, at most, is teaching people about circuits, VOR's and NDB's, and how to read instruments.  

FAA certification is another level, and only one flight sim, with the correct hardware, is qualified for that.  

Flight sims are an entertainment platform used for a hobby.  There are some cases where an add on can be used for flight training to help a pilot stay fresh, but if I, or any person with common sense, came across a pilot on a commercial aircraft, who said he got his training from MSFS, I'd be looking for another airline or another pilot.

100% CORRECT. There are a few developers who manage to simulate systems pretty well. And as you rightfully mentioned, it can help a pilot in that particular aircraft type to refresh their system knowledge. And as I mentioned, even level D sims are not perfect, and many times you hear pilots saying "what a .... the real airplane doesn't do that". I'm afraid that people often use bombastic statements regarding getting training on these platforms. Granted, these 2020 and 2024 are very nice "flight sims," but they are in no way ready for that kind of training. They can serve as a broad introduction to flying. 

18 minutes ago, Funky D said:

I had the opposite experience when getting my PPL... my instructor routinely said I was more prepared than most of his students and I hit milestones like my solo and XC's faster as a result. I attribute much of that to all I learned in MSFS before my training along with using MSFS as a supplement during my training. Heck, I thank MSFS (this was 2004) for helping me easily spot one of the airports of my solo cross country, even with those outdated graphics! I regularly brought up my at-home "training" during debriefs and my instructor was all for it. I did Part 61 and finished in just above the minimum of 40 hours. I have no doubt that MSFS saved me thousands in training costs.

Any consumer flight sim is what you make of it. It can be a game or a powerful training tool (or both)!

Note the years I added in my post.  My CFI also hated GPS's.  I asked him what would he do if I broke out a GPS when I was doing my first solo, and he said he would literally throw it in the trash.

Back then, we used WAC's, flight calculators (the old metal ones.  Not the electronic types), paper, kneeboards and a pencil.  I still keep in touch with him, and he's obviously adapted to the current times, but he's very old school, and maintains that nothing can replace a hard copy of a flight route and charts.

Edited June 11, 2025Jun 11 by GoranM

1 hour ago, GoranM said:

During the briefing, he told me, word for word, "Forget what you know about that flight sim.

Totally agree with you, exactly what my instructor said a few years back. I remember even asking whether having flight sim experience was of any benefit, and his reply was basically you flight sim dudes can be tougher to teach with your bad habits. He did reluctantly admit it would be good for instrument, but in his words, man let's get you flying level first.

But as an aside – this was just about when MSFS2020 came out. And actually I did find it helpful. Not for any flight characteristics, but learning how to translate my understanding of the area into what it actually looks like up at 2,000ft. Like I lived here all my life and thought I'd be able to tell instantly where I was, but it was an interesting early challenge just to adapt to perceiving my knowledge of the landscape at that sort of an altitude. The accuracy of the satellite data made all the difference and the way MSFS was depicting the area we would train felt really accurate.

The other benefit, also scenery related. There was a tin shed with a red roof on the approach path, about a mile from the threshold. My instructor used that shed as reference a lot – you gotta be over it, configured, on speed and basically ready to put it down. I loved the fact that shack was right there in MSFS2020 (now in glorious photogrammetry too!) so I could just practice gauging distances visually from the safety of my own home. 

 

 

 

Edited June 11, 2025Jun 11 by Georgleboui

3 hours ago, Georgleboui said:

I remember even asking whether having flight sim experience was of any benefit, and his reply was basically you flight sim dudes can be tougher to teach with your bad habits. He did reluctantly admit it would be good for instrument, but in his words, man let's get you flying level first.

I had the exact same thing said to me. As proficient a pilot that Rod Machado is, along with the Kings, his instructional series didn’t even scratch the surface of what piloting really is about.