Background Simulation is among the tools used in France to train residents specialising in orthopaedic and trauma surgery (OTS). However, implementing simulation-based training (SBT) is complex and poorly reported. The objective of this study was to describe the use of simulation for OTS training in France. Hypothesis Nationwide, SBT is not used to its full capacity for teaching OTS in France, and differences in opinions about SBT may exist between surgeon educators and residents. Study design Nationwide questionnaire survey in France. Materials and Methods We built two specific self-questionnaires then e-mailed them between December 2020 and February 2021 to the surgeon educators who were members of the national university council and to the residents specialising in OTS during the current academic year. The questions were about the 2018–2019 academic year, before the COVID-19 pandemic. Two classes of residents who were still medical students during this period were not included, leaving three classes for the analysis. Results The participation rates were 57% (67/117) for the educators and 24% (87/369) for the three classes of residents. Of the 67 educators, 47 (70%) reported being involved in SBT and identified the university (70%) and industry (53%) as the main funders of this teaching modality. The educators indicated that the mean number of SBT laboratories in their region was 1.4 ± 0.9 (range, 0–4). The main types of simulators were saw bones (77%); cadavers (85%); and commercial simulators (74%), notably for the knee (87%) and shoulder (78%). The educators estimated that they had achieved a mean of 33% ± 23% (range, 0%–100%) of the teaching objectives set out in the OTS curriculum and that the main obstacles were insufficient funding (81%) and lack of time (67%). Only 21% of educators reported conducting SBT research. The residents reported that they accessed SBT via the OTS teaching module (28/87, 32%), local university degrees (23/87, 26%), their hospital department (17/87, 18%), or the industry (15/87, 17%); 25/87 (29%) had never received SBT. On a 0–10 scale (0, completely disagrees; 10, completely agrees), the mean score for SBT effectiveness was 8.6 ± 2.1 for residents and 7.1 ± 3.0 for educators (p < 0.001); the corresponding values for the quality of SBT integration in the region were 1.5 ± 1.8 and 3.8 ± 2.6, respectively (p < 0.001). Conclusion SBT is not yet used to its full potential for teaching OTS in France. Insufficient funding and lack of time were identified by the educators as the main obstacles to greater use of SBT. Both the residents and the educators felt that SBT mightbe beneficial for training.