I served in both the Marines and the Army. I saw huge difference in how things were run between those branches and it's best illustrated by road marches to get to a point. This isn't about Marines VS Army, it's about two different perspectives. with points to each side.

In the Marines we endured a grueling pace, moving rather fast and it was an SOB to keep up on road marches. Some Marines didn't cut it and fell back and they got policed up and and scheduled for additional training. If someone contined to have a problem they'd chapter them out as unsuitable. We didn't want anyone who couldn't hang with the group as it'd slow us down.

In the Army, even in the 18th Airborne Corps with the exception of the individual 12 milers in combat gear, road marches went at the pace of the slowest...they had a stupid expression-you're only as strong as your weakest link whereas the Marines were about 'keep up, catch up, or get out'. You'd many NCO's who actually were the weak link, along with some privates.

Is it better to have a shorter chain or limit yourself by limiting your group to the capabilities of the weakest link?

The military and survivalism have very different objectives, but this is about doing movement. I'm thinking that breaking the chain off might be more effective. There's this seemingly essentially, but actually deterimental view 'we must keep together'.

Why?

If you've got a group that has fast movers who can do so, and they can get to a site quickly, rest, then begin setting up things while it's still light, when the slow folks stagger into camp, everyone will be better off. If the pace is slowed down to the slowest person, the quick, healthy people are held back and they have to work like mad with less light and everyone runs the risk of being caught out in the open when night falls and weather changes.

In preparedness, with likely family and friend groupings kicking the weak to the side isn't a viable option for most compassionate people, but I'm bringing this up from a different perspective. With stiff joints and bad knees, I'm going to be the weak link if we do foot movement. I don't want to be the one holding back my healthy children and in-laws.

Therefore, taking a second look at a tertiary play-to move on foot, I have accepted the notion that we'll have to move in two groups. One fleeter on foot, more alert and more active, one slower and clumbersome, not pushing to the point of being harmed, not harming by slowing others down.

Just a thought.

And If my group were to adopt the faster move on first doctrine, that also means the most combat ready, or best trained in my family's case. If all of the soldiers run out in front and the geezers and kids are set upon by an enemy or a mountain lion or some such thing, we have to run back to help before we lose everyone.

And one thing I found out in the Army is that you don't have to be fast or strong to put supressive fire down range. Even a slow person can be useful.

We do have a two group policy but only when it is required. We have the general group, and then the AFO group, a group selected for their versatility and proficiency at various tasks working in a small group.

The way I'm thinking about this, is people like me would be part of that very slow, but very mean and very irritable group. Someone going after that slow group is hitting the wrong folks!

Heck, I remember my younger days, during the misery of a road march, I wanted to scrap!

I think if you stock the slow group with a few well trained, cool headed leaders like yourself it could work! Even if you had to have one or two of your younger, faster members stay back and lead. Then, if trouble did show up, the group would have experienced leaders to draw on and be able to defend themselves better. Also, the group moving on ahead is likely to draw fire/attention first and your slower group may wind up being the calvary!! Cavalry

I would rather they be the cavalry...

...Christ died on Calvary.

Amazing the difference a small error can make

But back to the OP, I agree to a point. The Marines set a rather grueling pace, BUT we did not leave folks behind. Not on forced marches, and not on pt runs. What we WOULD do is circle around and have the slower ones be helped along at the front. On a longer event, there were times that the faster stronger ones would carry - literally - the slower ones.

Perhaps your unit did things differently? We were fortunate to always have strong Esprit de Corps in our officers and NCOs.

Being one of the marines i knew to keep up but that was 43 years ago. now i am the one hanging behind and covering the rear. for every one on point, some one has to cover the rear