This is all you need to know about military mobility

The invasion of Ukraine, uncertain US commitment to NATO, possible Russian military ambitions elsewhere: it is clear that Europe needs to step up for its own defense. That includes moving military freight, far and fast. What do you need to know about military mobility? And what does it mean for the rail sector?

Military mobility is the new hot topic in transport and logistics. In order to get you up to speed, this explainer answers some key questions on what it means for rail. It explores why rail is important for security, which challenges are ahead of Europe, which possible solutions there are and what it all means for the rail freight sector. Lastly, there is a short history about European rail military mobility.

1. Why is rail suddenly so important for Europe’s security?

The deteriorating security situation in Europe has put rail centre stage as a key component in defense. Russia’s occupation and annexation of Crimea in 2014 revived the need to boost military capabilities among allied NATO countries – including logistical capabilities. With the full-scale invasion of Ukraine that started in 2022, that need has grown drastically.

That is because logistics can help deter aggression and prevent conflict, not to mention its role in an active conflict. In an interview with RailFreight.com, former commander of US Army Europe Ben Hodges explained that rail is key in deterrence. In his words, it is all about showing the adversary that you can move more troops and equipment faster than they can. If an adversary then concludes that a military operation is too risky of an affair, there won’t be one.

This is where rail comes in. Trains are crucial in moving a lot of freight quickly and over long distances. It is uniquely suitable to transport heavy and dangerous military equipment, such as vehicles, artillery systems and air defense units. A single train can replace an entire road convoy.

Moreover, roads are often not suitable for the heavy weight of military vehicles: for example, a German Leopard 2 tank can weigh up to 70 tonnes, whereas most European roads can handle a maximum weight of 40 tonnes.

2. What are the challenges for rail military mobility in Europe?

Experts have identified challenges in many different areas. First and foremost are infrastructure limitations: weak bridges, tunnels that are too small for military equipment, different rail gauges between countries and similar obstacles.

Then there are rolling stock constraints. Europe has far too few wagons adapted to military needs, and civilian rail companies typically do not reserve wagons for defense purposes. Moreover, legal and procedural issues remain an obstacle. Countries authorise transport, in particular when it comes to dangerous goods, in different ways. That complicates the issuance of permits and can delay transport.

Lastly, there is the question of expertise. Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has “forgotten” how to move troops and equipment on a large scale. Even moving a brigade (consisting of 3,000 to 5,000 troops) would prove to be a challenge, let alone a division (between 10,000 and 25,000). How does one even organise such movements across many countries?

3. Which steps can Europe take to boost its military capacity on rail?

There is an estimated 94% overlap between the civilian freight and military rail network. And fortunately, a lot of the measures that are good for civilian freight are also good for military mobility. In that sense, Europe can achieve a lot by simply continuing ongoing efforts to improve rail freight.

For example, implementation of the rail security and management system ERTMS could improve international compatibility and make cross-border traffic easier. And a robust infrastructure network with redundant capacity could ensure sufficient rail availability at all times. The (much-desired by the rail freight sector) 740-metre trains would boost transport capacity significantly for both military and civilian needs.

A notable mention is Rail Baltica. The Baltic states are perhaps Europe’s most vulnerable countries, connected to its allies only via the narrow Suwałki corridor. Only a railway, a highway and a provincial road connect Lithuania with Poland. That is not a lot, and when it comes to the railway, a gauge change is also needed. That demands very costly time.

Rail Baltica aims to resolve that problem by building a standard gauge railway all the way up to Tallinn, Estonia. However, the project is mired in financial problems, especially in Latvia. It remains unclear when Rail Baltica will reach completion. One thing is clear however: it is taking much too long.

When it comes to rolling stock, Europe simply needs more of it for military purposes. But Ben Hodges has also suggested a programme where rail operators would have to guarantee that they can show up with enough rolling stock to move two brigades on a 72-hour notice. In return, they can get preferential access to government contracts.

Moreover, Europe also needs a clear framework to coordinate defense movements, in order to make sure that the military can move quickly. Unfortunately, there is no clear picture on how agencies will work together for so-called Reception, Staging, and Onward Movement (RSOM, the various stages in moving troops and equipment around) and how movements would be prioritised according to operational needs.

NATO’s JSEC is supposed to help with that, but experts are unsure of the role it really plays in coordination. Either way, a functional governance structure is necessary, potentially with prioritised rail access for the military over civilian traffic.

This is not an exhaustive overview of all the ideas and suggestions that people have suggested, but it should give an idea of the sorts of things that experts are discussing.

4. What does all of this mean for the rail freight sector?

A focus on robust rail infrastructure and interoperability will make rail more competitive compared to other modes of transport – something that the sector keeps pushing for. In that sense, military mobility developments could be very promising for the civilian freight business.

Beyond that, it is likely that rail companies will be involved in military affairs more and more in the future. We are already seeing that happen: The German Bundeswehr has reached out to logistics companies, among which is DB Cargo, to see what they can contribute to the army’s logistics needs. The Polish operator PKP Cargo trained with the army to practice loading of military equipment, and Dutch infrastructure manager ProRail is researching what the military needs in terms of infrastructure.

5. How did we get where we are now with rail military mobility?

During the Cold War, NATO placed high priority on logistics in Europe. Once the Cold War was over, the alliance’s focus shifted from fighting a large war in Europe to expeditionary operations elsewhere. As a result, European logistics became less important. Rail infrastructure for defense needs and international coordination faded into the background.

Starting in the early 2000s, many Eastern European countries became NATO members. They brought with them different rail regulations and standards, and in the case of the Baltic states, a different rail gauge altogether. That complicates rail logistics if you need to move from west to east, but at the time, it was not yet a primary concern.

Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea changed the picture. NATO started thinking again about European logistics, and (some) money started to flow. The EU’s Connecting Europe Facility allocates financing to projects for military mobility, and the standard gauge Rail Baltica project was started. Within the framework of PESCO, European states also started coordinating military mobility regulations and policies.