A Rumsfeldian Moment - Just thinkin!

This morning, I got to thinking…  and those who know me, know how that usually turns out.

Flight simulation and flight training feel like they’re approaching something interesting — maybe even a shared crossroads. The word that kept surfacing for me was synergy: and the question —how do we bring these two worlds together in a way that genuinely improves both training outcomes and the home simulation experience?

So, I put my retired-consultant cap back on and started pulling at the thread. I haven’t hit bottom yet, but I think there’s enough here to start a meaningful conversation.

Let’s begin with first principles.

Strip flight simulation down to its core and you are left with two primary components: 

• the human 
• the technology.

Humans operate in two domains: 

• reality and 
• fantasy. 

Reality offers limited control. Fantasy — within bounds — is entirely ours. 

Flight simulation lives squarely in that second space: a constructed experience where we recreate flying in our minds, assisted by increasingly capable technology.  The level of fidelity depends on the individual — what they need, what they’re willing to invest, and how far they want to push the illusion.

And yet, this “fantasy” has roots.  Long before computers, devices like the 1910 Antoinette Barrel hinted at what was possible. 

More on this story Antoinette and early flight simulation - Engineering and Technology History Wiki

A century later, we’re surrounded by systems those early pioneers couldn’t have imagined.  The question is: a hundred years from now, how will pilots look back on what we did with today’s tools?

That brings us to the ecosystem.

Two forces drive it: 

• technology and 
• the user base.

On the technology side, we have something that is digital, transferable, flexible, and increasingly powerful — though not fully mature. AI is waiting in the wings, and it’s not a stretch to say it will reshape the landscape.

On the user side, there’s a spectrum. Gamers — many with no intention of flying in the real world — sit at one end. Potential pilots sit in the middle. And then there are post-gamers: student pilots and certificated aviators who use simulation as a supplement, a rehearsal tool, or in some cases, a proving ground.

Supporting all of this is the hardware and software stack: CPUs, GPUs, displays, controls, and an ever-expanding ecosystem of simulation platforms and add-ons that push fidelity closer to something usable.

Now, here’s where we have a bit of a Rumsfeldian moment. As Donald Rumsfeld once put it:

“There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns—the ones we don't know we don't know.”

It sounded clever the first time I heard it. Over time, I’ve come to appreciate just how useful it is.

The known knowns are straightforward. 

Flight simulation works — within limits. It has a proven track record across airlines, the military, flight schools, and increasingly, the home environment. 

But let’s be clear: simulators don’t replicate flight. They provide clues and cues — visual, procedural, sometimes tactile — and the user interprets those clues and cues as reality. When it works, it works remarkably well. When it doesn’t, the gaps matter.

The known unknowns are where things open up. 

We don’t yet understand the full potential of home simulation. We don’t know what hardware is coming next, what it will cost, or how accessible it will be. We don’t know how AI will integrate — whether it becomes an instructor, a scenario generator, or something else entirely. And we don’t know who the long-term players will be. Microsoft abandoned the market before, and startups are always an unknown until they aren't.

And then there are the unknown unknowns—which, by definition, we can’t yet see.

That’s probably enough for one sitting.

I thought this would be simple — more like peeling an apple. Turns out, it’s closer to peeling an onion… with the usual side effects. 

As for that “crossroads stuff” I mentioned earlier, I’ll take that up in a future post.

Your thoughts,

Kenneth (Ken) Butterly, Founder