John - 100% agree with your comments re the sim vs. the airplane.
The last transition course I had with the airborne component was on the L1011 (mid-80's) and we did circuits for four of the best-'funnest' hours of my career. From then on, simulators were good enough to certify pilots on-type without the airborne work.
For others wondering about this idea, six-axis (full motion) simulators have been used for thirty years + for airplane transition courses to save airlines money by not flying the real thing. It's also a lot safer practising the necessary engine-out procedures and all other system abnormalities that one can do in a simulator but never in an airplane.
But I would never look to simulators to "maintain" flying skills. A simulator is a training tool - mainly for procedures, (CAT II/III, engine-out, system failures, LOFT work etc). It is no substitute for a real aircraft and should never be looked upon, especially by regulators and accountants, as a suitable for such work.
Flying and thinking like a pilot cannot be learned in a simulator. It can only hone and replenish already-learnt skills.
A simulator only reaches its full potential in teaching and training when one is already a pilot and already skilled at thinking and handling and stayin' alive when the real airplane is trying to kill you.