The Premise
There is a dangerous assumption in National Resilience planning that in a crisis, the military can simply "take over" civilian logistics networks. This is false. Military logistics (MACA) operates on "Command" logic. Civilian rail networks operate on "Commercial Contract" logic. When these two operating systems collide, the result is not efficiency; it is gridlock.
Intelligence Update: The Gauge Friction
Civilian rail networks are optimised for efficiency (Just-in-Time, tight slots). Military movements are optimised for mass (Surge capacity).
You cannot just "send a train." A military heavy-lift train requires specific pathing to avoid colliding with commuter services, bridge weight restrictions that civilian software does not flag for military loads, and platform clearances that do not match armoured vehicle widths.
Field Evidence: The MACA Failure Log
Military logistics planners attempted to interface with civilian rail freight to move critical PPE. The civilian scheduling software could not ingest "priority override" commands without manually cancelling thousands of commercial slots.
The Result: Critical supplies often moved faster by road because the software handshake between the MOD and Network Rail took too long to negotiate.
Moving NATO heavy armour into Ukraine faced a physical logic gap: the difference in rail gauge (1435mm vs 1520mm). It was not just the wheels. The loading gauge (height/width) of Western tanks exceeded the clearance of Soviet-era tunnels and platforms.
The Lesson: Logistics is not about "will power." It is about geometry. If the tank is 10cm too wide for the platform, no amount of political will moves it.
The Verdict
Resilience is not a "Switch" you flip. It is a "Protocol" you practise. If your Civil-Military interface has not been stress-tested for Physical Interoperability (Gauge, Weight, Software), your crisis response will fail at the last mile.