I don't think it suggests anything of the sort, it is badly worded, but the implication is that if you have completed a proficiency check or skill test in another type or class of aeroplane, you are exempt the experience requirement. If such a test is permitted in a Synthetic device, which would need to have appropriate credits to be used in such a role, then you have fulfilled the requirement. The original purpose was to exempt people who operate in a controlled environment from the need to fly with an instructor.
Are you sure? Handling skills would seem to me to be the most important thing.
It doesn't matter how experienced an SEP pilot is, they may have picked up some bad habits. The point of the 1 hour
flight with an instructor in an
SEP was to identify (and hopefully correct) these.
I would suggest that the exemption was intended to apply to pilots who have already completed an equivalent
flight and that is why it is purposefuly
worded the way it is: ".....
in any other class or type of aeroplane"
An airline pilot passing an LPC, in a full-motion Sim, in a multi-crew enviroment is about as far removed from SEP flying as you can get;
and many flying schools say airline pilots take longer to get checked out (especially Approach and Landing) than pilots who only fly SEP.
I do not know whether the intention of the "rule makers" was to accept successful tests, etc in a Sim or not.
As BEagle has already drafted a proposed amendment to the Exemption wording perhaps (if not too late) he could add in a line, either confirming that
a simmulator is acceptable for this purpose or specifically excluding it, before it gets discussed at any rule making commitee?