Airlines, aircraft manufacturers and safety organizations routinely use their professional simulators to examine incidents, crashes and near misses. I've been told that just a couple hours after the AAL DC-10 crash in Chicago - simulator pilots had figured out how to survive the engine coming off over the wing. But the crew of that flight never knew that the engine had fallen off the aircraft.
To my knowledge - professional pilots is full motion simulators have not been able to successfully land the Gimli Glider - Air Canada at Winnipeg. This is probably more a fault of the way flight dynamics are done in those high dollar simulators than the pilots' ability. Full motion simulators don't really have a lot of data to successfully model the aerodynamics and interaction with the air of a no-engine flight.
The same thing with the Air Transat aircraft at the Azores, though I've read of a few pilots being successful in the landing there.
Our Flight Simulator program is also limited data to correctly model what actually happens with the aircraft in those situations. It is more of a good luck than and actual recreation.
It is interesting to note that both the Gimli Glider and the Air Transat aircraft came in too high and too fast for anything close to a normal landing. The pilot of the Air Canada bird side slipped the plane to lose altitude, but not might speed. The Air Transat aircraft actually made some 360 turns within sight of the runway to lose altitude.
Both suffered burst tires because the pilots stood on the brakes when the plane got on the ground. At Lajes in the Azores - there was a danger that if the aircraft went off the far end of the runway - there is a 180 foot drop down a cliff to the ocean.
@ PawPaw's house - near KADS, Addison, Texas, USA