I feel like the use case of people who want extremely accurate flight modeling and physics + want to control their plane with a QWERTY keyboard is 0%.

I'm in that "0%", for what it's worth.

I want the leisure time my kids and I spend on X-Plane to count towards my/their overall ability to fly a small plane someday (a lifelong dream), but (a) I don't have room for flight gear -- there's barely space for my tiny home office desk, and (b) I can't even justify spending $100 right now for a flight yoke amid other financial obligations (it was a splurge to spend $60 for X-Plane 11).

Honestly, I probably would have bought Microsoft's 2020 FS instead if it ran on macOS.

You might want to check into ultralight flight training. Much cheaper than a "real" private pilot's license (in Canada, a minimum 10 hours of flight time, including 2 solo, although it's sensible to budget for double that). At my local airport, ultralights can be rented for CAD $150/hour or so.

There is also the classroom portion, which for an ultralight should be under CAD $1,000.

My opinion is that people who start in simulator have a hard time adjusting to flying visually (the fundamentals). The sim forces you to look at your instruments which is a bad habit to break.

But something constructive: Consider enrolling them in the Young Eagles (https://www.eaa.org/eaa/youth/free-ye-flights) if you haven't already.

I solo'd an aircraft on my 16th birthday and learned everything I knew up to that point in Falcon 4.0, Flight Unlimited, Fly!, MSFS, and more sims from that day. Of course we went over it in training, but the sim work that preceded it was extremely helpful and I breezed through the instruction.

Interesting, I'm not sure I agree.

I can take off and land a small plane in a simulator without looking at the instruments at all (except maybe a couple glances at the air speed indicator as I set up for landing), and I've never flown in a real small plane.

I always thought visual flying was a crutch and instrument flying is the "real thing" that I know I can't do.

No, both types of flying are very important to "real" pilots.

The kind of flying you're doing (basically) is called VFR, for visual flight rules. You keep an eye on your instruments of course but a lot of the flying is getting done just by looking out the window.

While a trained pilot certainty CAN fly on instruments alone (which is a separate certification on top of your regular license), no sane pilot would choose to ignore what is happening outside if visibility is decent. GOOD pilots like to have all the information they can, at all times.

Ain't that kind of the point: to be forced to actually look at your instruments? From what little I know about flying, that's kind of a critical skill unless you expect to only fly in VFR conditions and never IFR.

The first pilot license most people get involves flying VFR almost exclusively.

We can drop the 'almost'. If a pilot holds only a basic PPL, that means they aren't qualified for any flight in IMC.

These days it's common for PPL student pilots to undergo a little training under simulated IMC, but inadvertent VFR flight into IMC is an emergency condition and, if I understand correctly, is the top cause of fatal VFR aviation accidents.

You don't need to invest in all that kit if you don't want too - I have most of the pretty typical "kit" for a flight simmer, yet I'm often too lazy to haul it all out and set it up (I don't leave it out in between "sessions" since I work from that computer too).

So, very often I wind up flying with just my cheap Logitech joystick, but even an XBox controller would be a huge step up from mouse/keyboard only.

Having programmable buttons available at your fingertips without having to take your eyes off screen and look for a button really adds to the immersion in my opinion.

It would be funny to peak into a cockpit and see a pilot w a QWERTY keyboard on his lap.

Well, pop into the cockpit of the A380 or the A350 and you'll see that exact situation.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DUdKMKeXUAAjrFO?format=jpg&name=...

Sure enough ... there it is ...

When I play Assetto Corsa I don’t necessarily seeking to simulate operating dipsticks and clearing TPMS warnings. But I don’t want to be able to go through corners without braking either.

>What percentage of x-plane users do you think ACTUALLY use it for learning to fly an airplane

What does it matter? I play city simulation games, and want them to be realistic, because I find the realism fun. Not because I plan on building my own city.

Wanting a realistic flight simulator that gives the real sensation of flying does not mean you must then become a pilot.

And unlike any city sim game I'm aware of, X-Plane is actually used as a research tool in real aerospace engineering applications.

Anecdotally: a lot! I find it very useful for practicing IFR procedures and approaches. You can connect it to an external comm service like Vatsim and a real human will even give you vectors and clearances! (They, too, are using it for realistic practice for a job with air traffic control)

You know that if you want a more arcade oriented flight sim there's flight simulator right?

That's not Laminar's goal, and that's not the market they're in. You can see that in the post, it's by the founder of Laminar. It's pages upon pages of gushing over flight modelling.

Hardly aspirational.

They sell a (much more expensive) version that is FAA-certified for training.

> They sell a (much more expensive) version that is FAA-certified for training.

It's not even that much more expensive, the Pro edition is 750.

Though unless you also have real sim hardware it's a completely useless expense as aside from FAA cert validators the features are mostly for multi-projector systems (image warping, edge blending).

> What percentage of x-plane users do you think ACTUALLY use it for learning to fly an airplane (in the sense that they do or will go fly that actual plane IRL)?

Based on my anecdotal observations of people I know IRL who use X-Plane? 100%.

xplane is built for a certain use case, and that's real simulation, their real paying customers are using it to actually learn how to fly.

people using it for other purposes may be more in number, but focusing the product on their use case would dilute the intended product, and they don't actually pay the pro pricing

it's not optimizing for an aspirational use case, the product is for this very niche use case. letting other people use it for fun is just a bonus.

If you want a flight sim that maximizes fun, there are other options.

That is what I hope for. We need more not less options. Hope that niche survive. But would it migrate out so not facing normal consumers I wonder one day.