Abstract. Along with validity, fidelity is one half of the simulator design equation. Enhancing the fidelity of a fullcab simulator is difficult if the requisite collaboration between the procurers and developer has been undermined during its iterative design stages. More often than not, the simulator design, specification, and deployment processes exploit nuanced differences that impact on collaborative principles and practices. Once full-cab simulators have been deployed, any options for improvement may be limited, costly, and physically constrained by architectural design choices used to house the equipment. This paper presents the case study of a rail simulator, designed for human factors and occupational safety research, which was used to explore new techniques for facilitating simulation design and delivery. Originally, a fidelity audit on this simulator revealed a number of constraints - issues which limited the options for improvement, and could be traced back to boundaries in the developer-procurer collaborative dynamic. Whilst a number of the identified problems were addressed, some of the larger concerns could not be resolved, and as far as improvement was concerned, ‘that train had already left the station.’ However, unrelated plans to subsequently relocate the simulator provided the opportunity to address the issues anew. This paper details how the previously unresolvable issues were addressed, and describes the techniques that were used to cross boundaries, activate positive collaboration, and redevelop the simulation design profile. These outcomes may be used to innovate simulation planning and delivery. Importantly, some of the original design choices went on to foreshadow what could and could not be improved in spite of the relocation, and the paper concludes with an erudite commentary on the importance of professional collaboration when specifying a simulator, and then subsequently, in its birthing.