You have been misled concerning the accuracy of simulators. "All models are wrong, some are useful" is a helpful quote to remember here. Certified sims are typi

You have been misled concerning the accuracy of simulators. "All models are wrong, some are useful" is a helpful quote to remember here. Certified sims are typically very accurate when it comes to avionics and systems. They are often much less representative where vehicle dynamics are concerned. Even the most heavily analyzed aircraft can produce surprises once they actually take to the air. Look up "Super Hornet uncommanded wing drop". Or look at dynamic scaling tests (https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/483000main_ModelingFlight.pdf https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/483000main_ModelingFlight.pdf) which uncovered two spin modes in the F-15 that were previously entirely uncharacterized. (Not sure if the linked doc covers that instance specifically -- I learned this from speaking with the study PI. And no, most aircraft programs don't get to do dynamic scaling tests.) All this is to say that a variety of potential non-linear behavior is lurking inside any given airframe, and all the wind tunnels and CFD in the world will merely allow you to model most of the useful operating conditions, but certainly not all of them. Simulators, just like autopilots, are useful for finite input ranges. If you leave those input ranges, your simulator will precisely and repeatably model a fantasy, and your autopilot will disconnect. Source: Short career as an aerospace engineer.