Why Calling Clear Prop in a Simulator Is Exactly What Good Training Looks Like

A flight instructor recently called out “Clear prop” at full volume while seated in a simulator, well away from any aircraft or flight line. His colleagues may have laughed. He was doing it exactly right. The science of how the brain builds skill under pressure explains why, and it has direct implications for how every pilot should approach simulator training.

Why “Clear Prop” in a Simulator Is Not a Joke

The brain does not distinguish between simulation and reality when it comes to procedural memory - the neural pathways that govern automatic, practiced responses. When you skip a checklist item in the simulator because “there’s no real airplane,” you are training yourself to skip it. That is not an exaggeration.

Transfer of training research, studied extensively in aviation since the 1960s, shows consistently that habits formed in a simulator transfer into the aircraft. All habits. Including the shortcuts.

The inverse is equally true. Discipline practiced in the simulator - full checklist flows, verbal callouts, position reports, approach briefs - transfers into the cockpit just as reliably.

What the Military Learned First

Naval aviators have been training carrier approaches in simulators since the 1970s. Not because the hardware was cheap. Because immersion is what makes training stick. The realism that matters is not in the motion platform or the visual system. It is in the behavior of the pilot inside it.

The concept has a formal name in training research: conditions of practice. The consistent finding across nearly every domain of skill acquisition is that practice conditions that match performance conditions produce better transfer. If you call clear prop before every engine start in the airplane, you call it in the simulator.

What Devices You Can Actually Log

Not all simulator time is equal under FAA regulations. The distinction matters for currency and certificate requirements.

The FAA recognizes two certified categories of training device below full flight simulator level:

• BATD (Basic Aviation Training Device): The lower tier. Can be used to log instrument time toward certain ratings within limits.
• AATD (Advanced Aviation Training Device): The higher tier. Greater logging privileges, still subject to regulatory limits.

Both are governed by 14 CFR 61.4. If your flight school’s device does not appear on the FAA’s approved list, the time may be excellent practice - but it cannot be logged toward a certificate or rating.

For instrument currency specifically, 14 CFR 61.57 allows pilots to log the approaches, holding patterns, and course intercepts required to stay current in an FAA-approved training device, provided an authorized instructor is present. Without that instructor, in most cases, the time does not count. Ask the school to show you the FAA approval letter. If they cannot produce it, treat the device as practice only.

Full Flight Simulators: What Level D Actually Means

Above the BATD and AATD tiers are full flight simulators - motion platforms with hydraulic control forces and high-fidelity visual systems. Airlines use these for type rating and recurrent training. The highest classification the FAA recognizes is Level D, which is qualified to substitute for actual aircraft time in certain recurrency and check ride scenarios.

For general aviation pilots, full motion simulators are primarily accessible through training centers. Redbird Flight Simulations has built a network across the country at costs significantly below comparable aircraft time. AOPA’s Air Safety Institute has worked with these platforms extensively, and their data supports using them aggressively for proficiency work.

Which Scenarios Transfer Best - And Which Don’t

Transfers well:

Engine failure scenarios, including partial power loss, transfer exceptionally well. In an actual aircraft, you will practice engine failure at altitude a handful of times. In a simulator, you can do it twenty times in a session - on departure, on final, in IMC, at night. The automatic response that realistic emergencies demand can only be built through repetition that is not safe to replicate in the real airplane.

Unusual attitude recovery is another strong candidate. The vestibular illusions in a simulator are not identical to actual IMC, but the scan discipline and control inputs do transfer. This is especially valuable for spatial disorientation training, which contributes directly to controlled flight into terrain and loss of control accidents.

Instrument approaches to minimums, specifically the go-around decision when the runway is not in sight, is one of the hardest calls in IMC flying. The simulator allows a pilot to practice that exact decision repeatedly until it becomes automatic - something that cannot be replicated in live training without accepting genuine risk.

Crew resource management is almost entirely trainable in a simulator. Communication flows, challenge-and-response procedures, and crew decision-making are about language and procedure, not aircraft feel.

Transfers less well:

Crosswind landings - specifically the feel of the slip and the timing of the flare in gusty surface wind - still require the actual airplane. Use the simulator to build the visual scan for the approach. Use the aircraft for the landing.

Scenario-Based Training: The Right Framework

AOPA’s training community has pushed for years toward scenario-based training over task-based training. Rather than assigning isolated maneuvers, the student manages a flight from departure to arrival while dealing with realistic complications. The simulator is the natural home for this model because an instructor can introduce a problem, freeze the simulation, debrief the decision, and reset. That loop - scenario, debrief, reset - is not possible in a real aircraft.

An instrument-rated pilot overdue for an instrument proficiency check will find that a session in an FAA-approved training device with a realistic IMC scenario is the most efficient path to genuine proficiency. Approaches logged in benign conditions are not the same as an approach to minimums with an alternator failure and an ATC reroute. The simulator is where you rehearse that combination before it arrives for real.

Key Takeaways

• Procedural memory does not distinguish between simulation and real flight. Every shortcut practiced in the simulator is a shortcut trained into the response pattern.
• Only FAA-approved BATDs and AATDs qualify for loggable instrument time; verify your device’s status before logging. The governing regulation is 14 CFR 61.4 and 14 CFR 61.57.
• An authorized instructor must be present to log instrument approaches and holds in an approved training device.
• Engine failures, unusual attitude recovery, and approaches to minimums transfer strongly from simulator to aircraft. Crosswind landing feel does not.
• Level D full flight simulators represent the highest FAA fidelity classification and can substitute for actual aircraft time in specific recurrency scenarios.
• Treat the simulator with the same discipline as the aircraft. The procedural memory built there is the same memory you will draw on when things get complicated in actual flight.