How should mobility corridors be planned and defended in LSCO?

• A. Plan routings to maximize throughput at any cost
• B. Plan routings to avoid bottlenecks, secure lanes, perform route clearance, and ensure redundancy with fires and security perimeters
• C. Defend only main supply routes, ignore secondary
• D. Allow free movement through contested zones

Answer: (B)

Mobility corridors in LSCO must be treated as protected, resilient channels that enable continuous maneuver and sustainment while mitigating risk. The best approach plans routings to avoid bottlenecks, secures lanes, conducts route clearance to remove IEDs and obstacles, and builds redundancy with fires and security perimeters. By steering movement away from chokepoints, you reduce the enemy’s opportunity to disrupt transit. Secured lanes protect convoys and maneuver units from ambush and interdiction. Route clearance keeps paths safe and usable, removing hazards before they are exploited. Redundancy with fires and security perimeters ensures you have overlapping layers of protection and alternate routes in case one corridor becomes compromised, preserving tempo and reach.

Defending only main supply routes or allowing free movement through contested zones fails because it creates single points of failure and exposes forces to predictable, high-risk threats.