Flight simulators can be designed to train pilots or assess their flight performance. Low-Fidelity simulators maximize the initial learning rate of novice pilots and minimize initial costs; whereas, expensive, high-fidelity simulators predict the realworld in-flight performance of expert pilots (Fink & Shriver, 1978 Hays & Singer 1989; Kinkade & Wheaton. 1972). Although intuitively appealing and intellectually convenient to generalize concepts of learning and assessment, what holds true for the role of fidelity in assessment may not always hold true for learning, and vice versa. To bring clarity to this issue, the author distinguishes the role of fidelity in learning from its role in assessment as a function of skill level by applying the hypothesis of Alessi (1988) and reviewing the Laughery, Ditzian, and Houtman (1982) study on simulator validity. Alessi hypothesized that there is it point beyond which one additional unit of flight-simulator fidelity results in a diminished rate of learning. The author of this current paper also suggests the existence of an optimal point beyond which one additional unit of flight-simulator fidelity results in a diminished rate of practical assessment of nonexpert pilot performance.