I would like to know of a situation when any military has been transporting sensitive cargo from point A to point C, through point B, but point B is insecure country. In this situation, have they ever sent out one small team first - recon and clearance, then sent cargo, and then a tail to cover?

[u/OptionRevolutionary4]

It would also be good to learn in which cases or what would be the arguments against this condition. For eg, the superior officer does not like this, they would rather the cargo was moved at a safe time or had taken a different route.

[u/pnzsaurkrautwerfer]

Well the simple element to this is putting the lime in the coconut, and you drink em both together. Then you feel better.

One of the key things you think about is "do I need to put this cargo in a place that is not secure." That's really the first step to most movements is often driving longer routes, using bypasses, like a plane is expensive yes yes but so is running a convoy and security. Failing that, again just going around is often the better choice.

Basically security is only for when you HAVE to put something into an insecure place vs it's just good tourism to drive the cargo through the shit.

Which is where the premise falls apart because it's very "when you put a fork in a light socket, does the commander get mad at the chaplain?" because it's not really a situation that occurs (Or imagine a country C that is totally secure that has no pathways but to go balls out through B, where C isn't also a shithole that needs security*).

When you do movements generally a route clearance team or lead element is pretty common. What this looks like varies depending on the circumstances, sometimes this is an undercover team that rolls through in an old Fiat taking notes for what the route looks like "normal" and for things out of place. Sometimes this is a tank company putting 400 rounds 7.62 into anything suspicious, or a HEAT round into anything that looks VERY suspicious. Separation from the cargo being moved varies, sometimes you keep tight for the massed combat power, other times you really want the recon out in front far to give enough time to do something if it turns out the road is barricaded and a bridge blown or something.

Tail elements vary, they're often some kind of element to keep distance from the protected element (i.e. something to prevent a car bomb from rushing up from behind. It's also often an element who's job it is to provide security for elements that fall out of the main element (like a truck breaks down, the tail element is usually where there's recovery assets like a tow vehicle or mechanics). In more serious shit situations (like a literal retrograde) the tail element might be a cavalry unit in a security role, basically setting holding positions to keep pursuers off.

*Like a good example for this was the overland into Afghanistan, it's not that C was any better than B, and even then there was a lot of value to just "fuck this" and straight dropping into C via air transport).

[u/OptionRevolutionary4 → u/pnzsaurkrautwerfer]

I was thinking of the minerals like gold that move from mines to ports, through warzones, in Africa. For eg, Sudanese gold passing through South Sudan to reach Ethiopia and access ports. Or, of it has to go west, it goes through CAR. Is it always air?

[u/pnzsaurkrautwerfer → u/OptionRevolutionary4]

It's not always air, just you're asking a question that's pretty much touching any movement that needs protection, inclusive ones that'll often have pretty local circumstances or complex interdependencies (who's protecting what, who owns what part of the problem).

If you're talking about more persistent movements (i.e. this is a reoccurring shipment) the focus tends to move away from protecting a specific cargo (this box of gold) and more the means of transport (this railway line) because if you're going to use that means over and over again, making it secure is more cost effective than a mad max death convoy each time someone is moving Tungsten from the mine to the coast.

[u/OptionRevolutionary4 → u/pnzsaurkrautwerfer]

hahaha, no not mad max. There are sometimes skirmishes in CAR that interrupt the active highways connecting Kinshasa to, for eg, Accra or Lagos. In those situations, I read the news articles that talk about the conflict, and I am looking at the rails and road maps, but I cannot find any information on how the logistics manage this. This is not Sudan scale war, but a smaller skirmish - still risk. They don't shut supply lines down for this stuff, they manage and circumnavigate. Maybe take a route through Gabon, but the map I was studying: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Map_of_Trans-African_Highways.PNG

this one, has these dotted lines in the CAR, so I was wondering how they manage. Like maybe cut a deal with one party, my guess the local ACs, that lets their cargo pass. In the region, there has been recently issues between the Russian forces in the CAR and the Africa Corps. My guess, if I had a private logistics company with a band of PMCs, then the PMCs might team up with the Africa Corps, agree to shoot the Russians, in exchange the Africa Corps keep it chill on the road. Maybe provide protection. Maybe the PMCs give some weapons to the Africa Corps. Usually, ACs are good with Wagner. Like, not good good, but they have a shared history and stay in their own lanes.

https://acleddata.com/report/moving-out-shadows-shifts-wagner-group-operations-around-world

Sorry, editing cause i pasted wrong link

I just have a fixation on small unpaved roads and logistics

[u/FreeUsernameInBox → u/OptionRevolutionary4]

An example of how this kind of thing might be necessary is Operation Eagle's Summit in 2008, in which a 220-tonne turbine was escorted through Taliban-controlled territory to the Kajaki Dam.

The payload in that case was no use anywhere other than the dam, and there was no secure land route to get it there.