In this paper we will reconstruct the life-cycle of a training simulator of the Royal Netherlands Army in order to explore the concept of validation. The simulator, known as the Mobile Combat Training Centre (MCTC), is a Direct Fire Weapons Effect Simulator (DFWES) combined with an Area Weapons Effect Simulator (AWES) to support live training exercises. Its lifespan from requirements to disposal will probably cover more than 25 years. That is quite a long time for an advanced technical system within the dynamic domain of military training. We asked ourselves how it is possible that the requirements of the training simulator, formulated in the early nineties, are still considered relevant today? How can that be explained?
The preparations for the acquisition of MCTC started in 1993. A manufacturer was selected in 2000 as result of an open tender. By 2003 the system was accepted with a final test at training area Vogelsang in Germany. Now, in 2009, the system is undergoing a mid-life upgrade and an extension to battalion level. Currently the Royal Netherlands Army is a satisfied user of MCTC, which plays an important role in the integral training process of soldiers. The life cycle of MCTC can be divided into four phases: (1) the development of the official ‘statement of need’; (2) the preparation of the tender and selection of the manufacturer; (3) the development of the system by the manufacturer; and (4) the system being in-service and maintained. The system is expected to reach the ‘end life of type’ around 2018.
Each phase is explored and the argumentation of actions analyzed. We studied many internal documents (for example: requirements, contracts, quality reports and evaluation) and interviewed more than thirty officials who played a role in the life cycle of the training simulator (among them policy makers, military staff, procurers, quality auditors, developers, maintainers and, last but not least, users). This resulted in a rather diverse picture of arguments how things evolved. We will argue that the multi-stability of the concept of validation is necessary for the resilience of a system, drawing out the implications for policy makers.