C-17 aircraft are designed to carry around 100 paratroopers and their equipment, that didn’t stop an American C-17 leaving Kabul with 800 souls on-board.

Some are doubting this but it was again confirmed on the 20th of August, days after this article was published.

According to FAS, The C-17 measures approximately 174 feet long with a 170-foot wingspan.

“The aircraft is powered by four fully reversible Pratt & Whitney F117-PW-100 engines (the commercial version is currently used on the Boeing 757). Each engine is rated at 40,900 pounds of thrust. The thrust reversers direct the flow of air upward and forward to avoid ingestion of dust and debris.The aircraft is operated by a crew of three (pilot, copilot and loadmaster). Cargo is loaded onto the C-17 through a large aft door that accommodates military vehicles and palletized cargo.

The C-17 can carry virtually all of the Army’s air-transportable, outsized combat equipment. The C-17 is also able to airdrop paratroopers and cargo. Maximum payload capacity of the C-17 is 170,900 pounds, and its maximum gross takeoff weight is 585,000 pounds. With a payload of 130,000 pounds and an initial cruise altitude of 28,000 feet, the C-17 has an unrefueled range of approximately 5,200 nautical miles. Its cruise speed is approximately 450 knots (.77 Mach).”

You can listen to radio traffic where the number of people on-board is mentioned here.

At approximately 9:12 PM local time on the 15th, the Associated Press reported that the Taliban would soon declare the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan from the presidential palace in Kabul.

There is currently a massive evacuation underway by the U.S, Britain and others.

British transport aircraft including four C-17s, one A400M, one C-130 and three Voyagers are currently involved in evacuation efforts.

Huge British airlift effort underway in Afghanistan

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

85 COMMENTS

  1. 800 people at 100kg each is 80t , max payload is 77,5t and that should be a short range. To not talk about space. Don’t believe it.

    • I don’t think the average Afghan weighs 220lbs. Even with 1 bag each, they probably don’t weigh more than 80kg.

        • When people are scared to death and fear being left behind they will put up with a lot more than they normally would. I bet they were just relieved to be making it out alive. Hats off to the pilots and crews of the C-17(s) and the grunts on the ground providing force protection.

          • That is my thinking too with photo Donaldson posted. If that photo is 670 then a 100 more or so is not impossible.

          • Esp considering most Afghans are smaller than US soldiers and weigh a lot less than 100kg on average …

          • Absolutely Dan, it’s chaotic there. It brings back terrible scenes of people falling off airliner landing gear as they climbed out of Danang in 1975…

            The US/UK force protection is stopping the the whole thing from being overwhelmed.

            I just hope they aren’t forced to open fire to keep control…

        • Also, max payload means max fuel load as well. These 17s are going in fuel light to maximize cargo weight and then tanking almost immediately after takeoff. Several KC-10s in orbit over AFG

      • The world record is estimated to be (different records at the time gave different numbers) 1088 people on a B747 on an evacuation flight from Ethiopia in 1991.

    • Dude, seriously, you went through the math to validate what exactly?? The average afghani is not 100kg (probably more like 65kg) ,and lot of these people will likely be women and kids, didn’t factor that into your equation did you. 🙄

    • I did see a twitter video on the Guardian online paper showing as mass of people being piled into a C17 at the airport.

    • Most people don’t weigh that much tho even including baggage wich they probably don’t have as there’s 800 of them, so they could easily get under the 77.5t mark

    • 800 people is well within limits for the average weight for planning at least, especially if they were light on fuel leaving which it sounds like they were with all the AR going on.

      Dicey for sure, but doable if unpleasant. I’d hate to be the loadmaster trying to plan for that and probably having to tell people no more.

    • These people are not weighing 100kg each. I live in the UK and am not the most active person around (this is infact an overstatement of my activity) and I only weigh around 85kg.

      These people live in what was the 7th poorest country in the world, do substantially more daily activity than most brits, so certainly they are not weighing in at 100kg each or anywhere near that.

    • I just hope and pray that all passengers and luggages are screened well and no human bomb will ever make it on board.

      • Your math is off… 8000 kg / 100kg = 80 not 800. You’re missing a zero on that figure.

        The actual result is 80 t (metric tons), or 88.18 sh tn (short tons). He’s actually not wrong on the payload capacity, which is easily verified by Wikipedia, but the average afghan male is nowhere near 220 lbs (They are actually closer to ~150 lbs or ~68 kg), let alone woman and children that would also be onboard.

        That puts us at 54.4t which is well under the 77 t max lifting payload of the C17, especially considering the C17 can lift an abrams which is 67 t.

        Furthermore, to actually hit the maximum lift payload of the C17 (ignoring space constraints), if we assume that a standard US soldier (with gear) is ~300lbs, you can take 229 US soldiers and 571 average male afghans on a single flight.

        It’s pretty easy to conceive that they took 800 people in terms of lift capacity. I’m far more amazed about how they managed the space… Damn load masters are Tetris wizards.

      • If you’re going to correct math, please check your own. 800×100 is 80,000, not 8,000, which would be a bit over 88 tons.

        80kg is about the average weight in North America, but the average weight globally is 62kg, and in Asia a little under 58kg.

        I think he’s way overestimating the average weight, but you dropped 90% of it.

        I trust the people operating and loading the plane knew what they were doing, and people can accomplish a lot when motivated by an emergency situation.

      • Your math is very off and missing 1 zero. 800 people x 100kg is 80,000kg. That would be 176,369.8 lbs and would convert to 88.184 us tons or 78.736 uk tons.

    • Afghan people have babies. Or did you know that already. Should I also assume that you have a background as a Load Master on that particular aircraft?

      • Former load master, familiar with (and huge fan of) the C17. Loved this plane as it was almost impossible to load it “wrong” not only do I believe the number, they probably could have taken more…

    • Does the average Afghani really weigh 220 pounds (100kg)?
      My research shows the average Afghani male is 5’5″ and weighs 140.2 pounds.
      Considering that for every one person one pound over the “average” weight there should be another in the population that is one pound under 140 pounds, then the estimate weight should total approximately 56 short tons.
      This would leave a 41.5 short ton allowance.
      If my math is wrong, please correct me.
      So, for weight, I can believe the 800 number.
      My doubt is in the space for 800 people to stand inside the craft?
      Therein lies my question begging verification.

    • Traditionally you average weight of passengers at 170 lbs or 77 kg. At 164,900 lbs useful load, the C-17 could theoretically carry about 950 souls on board with full fuel (181,000 lbs.) With less fuel, you could up that number considerably, however aircraft weight and balance limits (and space) would be the critical issues.

    • 100kg each?You don’t understand, even Afganistan’s resources was exploited and many got rich with the 20 year “business” war …America was not able to develop the fastfood industry so most people are not ovwrweight

    • Your maths are wrong, if you take payload, divide by 800, that is less than 100 kgs per person, so 800 is obviously possible. The point is that the plane is full, which is good.

  3. The speed and suddeness of this collapse is astonishing. How to explain? The ANA is of the same blood as the Taliban so maybe the Western type structure did not fit the Afghans as well as we imagined nor were they keen to tell us what they really thought. Maybe they are not as fearful of a Taliban regime as people make out? What would be an analogy for the UK- a strictly Orthodox Anglican Theocracy in charge forcing us all to wear 17th century clothing and banning Morris dancing and Mead?
    I look to South Korea vs the North and there is no doubt they would fight to the last man to resist a Northern takeover so how come the same was not the case in Vietnam? Maybe it is something simple-the Taliban’s men are fanatics and retain the fierce passion that has kept foreigners out for Centuries whilst the ANA were badly led and fearful of the reprisals for which the Taliban are notorious.
    One thing for sure-democracy and individual freedoms are to be cherished but the regression in to a new Dark Age is spreading over the planet. In this, one has to wonder how one non athletic and unhealthy Korean holds such sway over millions. Perhaps therein lies the answer to this mystery.

    • Morning Geoff, from the night shift!

      I think, in their inter tribal political culture a deals a deal. It happened with the NA and General Dostrum in 2001, fighters change sides or surrender quickly with assurances of safety, free passage, and so on. Thousands of Taliban themselves surrendered then only to change heart and rise up at Qual I Jungi, where the NA, SBS and Green Berets destroyed them.

      As we’ve discussed on these articles so many times now ( when they’re not removed by trolls ) occupying Afghanistan and imposing our way over their way was never going to succeed forever.

      Go in. Kill terrorists. Get out. If they return repeat again and again using our flexibility, training, tech, SF, air power, intelligence. Which seems to be what our forces are setting up for.

      Worth remembering too it was the CIA and SIS who sowed the seed of this by training and arming them to fight the Soviet Union, including OBL before they turned once the Russians were ejected.

      As for Kim. Leave alone, and he will leave us alone. If he uses Cyber return the compliment with interest. He Sabre rattles for the regimes own survival. Fear from the people, with healthy doses of brainwashing, helps keep him there. The only reason the US has not gone in there and bombed them too is that the N Koreans have the bomb and China is next door.

      • Morning Daniele fellow early riser! Sometimes it’s just all to much trying to make sense of this world. I intuitively feel that’good’ people have a duty to help those in peril. I feel sad for the women in Afghanistan in particular who have to live under this backward system and also fear in general terms leaving the rise of truly evil dictatorships such as in parts of Asia, Africa and South America. there are some bloody awful thugs out there in China,Belarus,Venezuela,Zimbabwe etc. and hey I understand we cannot fix it all but if we leave it be and unchecked, then we put ourselves in peril by allowing this disease to spread

        • Morning Geoff, while I don’t disagree with you I can understand why our ‘do gooding’ would be resented and resisted. As we’ve seen with Afghanistan, not everyone wants what we have and certainly not all of it. You can’t help but think that ‘we’ (the UK) could have done more with Zimbabwe, with the help of regional neighbours but maybe not enough oil. Sorry for the cynicism.

          There’s also the thing about only being able to piss with the cock you’ve got, I’m not sure how The West could realistically ‘fix’ China or Russia and in the meantime they’ll be trying to do the same thing (in their favour) with the Afghanistan’s and Zimbabwe’s of the world. We’ll be doing this stuff until we somehow manage to have one planetwide government and even then I’m sure not everyone will be happy. Us humans are a fecked up angry bunch.

        • You’re not wrong geoff. But the “we” cannot just be the US and UK. Too many sit by and let us get on with it.
          By that I mean the non white eye nations.

          I think also it’s one thing to leave unchecked, I’m not suggesting that, and another to occupy, as happened in Afghanistan.

          Maybe China, with the manpower, can go in and smother them!! NATO only ever held the town’s, airports and key roads, too few men.

          NATO didn’t lose. We left. This would not be happening with western forces still in place. It was inevitable unless we were going to stay forever.

          Zimbabwe and the treatment of white farmers, I was in favour of going in there and dealing with that too. Still would be if they were getting slaughtered. It’s what happens after that we fail with, like in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan.

          • Hi Andy P and Daniele. Thanks for the wise input and chat.
            On the subject of Zimbabwe, Maggie Thtacher made a sad and ultimately really bad decision not to recognise the Zimbabwe government of Muzorewa. There was a wonderful opportunity to develop that country for all its people of all colours in what could have been a model for the rest of Africa to follow. Instead they gave in to the evil monster Mugabe who looted and destroyed the country during his almost 40 year reign-left his people starving and without even basic Healthcare while he spent millions on his own private health in the Far East and lived in a smaller version of Buck Palace in Harare. I am no racist nor am I a “Good Old Smithy” man but he(Smith) flaws and all, was a truly decent human being who could have along with Sithole and Muzorewa, made a paradise on earth of Zim.
            We soldier on chaps…

          • Best reason i’ve heard was the Taliban used the time between Trumps announcement the US was leaving and now to get the Provincial Governors and local military to agree to surrender. That’s why there’s been so little resistance. Just 1 theory.

          • Hello Daniele,
            Just thinking about your China comment, as I assume you know the Chinese are already looking to make economic deals in Afghanistan, but they will avoid any sort of conflict if possible and certainly wouldn’t go in to take over from where the west has left off with large numbers of soldats, there is no benefit for them at all and would leave them open to internal problems if they lose too many people and problems with the west if they kill to many.
            Outside of “white eyed” nations, many see this as a west problem, you broke it, you fix it type thing. From Russian perspective, we are more interested in this mess not traveling north in central Asian republics which is why the military has been having more joint exercises there

          • Morning Ulya.

            I know, I was not serious, only that China at least has the numbers.

            I agree totally with your concerns. Russia too has its problems with these religious fanatics.

            However, for all his faults as seen from the western perspective you have a leader who won’t stand for any nonsense with them. I have not followed this area of late, but are they still causing problems in Chechnya? What about your home, Kazakhstan?

          • Hello Daniele,
            I am from Astrakhan but my mother is originally from Kazakhstan. Chechnya is generally stable, Ramzan understand his country gets 80% of budget from Russia and to let the extremists get out of hand is bad for us all, so he keeps firm hand, even if he too extreme in his faith to my mind, we have some problem in Dagestan, FSB and spetsnaz keep that under control most times. I have a large dislike of these extremists and they can only be treated one way, I have had many bad experience with them over the years because I am much to loud in my opinion but this is wrong place to bore you with that

          • Ah. Ok. I know your from Astrakhan as we’d talked of that before when we were talking of the proximity of Volgograd and the Mamayev Kurgan.
            I thought there was Kazak origin there somewhere.

          • Well to be honest Ulya Afghanistan was in a good state before Russia invaded and pretty much started all this mess. Some people have short memories it seems.

          • I’m well aware Russia was there Dave, it is reasonably important part of our modern history but your country has been there 20 years, be responsible for your own mistakes

          • As I said Ulya all this mess started when Russia invaded but I’m well aware of my nations role in keeping Afghanistan relatively stable for 20 years when we had boots on the ground.

          • If you are looking for me to justify what the USSR did then I am going to disappoint you Dave, to me it was stupid for us to get involved just as I think it was stupid for you to get involved, Afghanistan has its reputation for a reason. If you wish to make formal complaint talk to the communist party or the Americans for their efforts there during that time. I was 7 when your country invaded and my only interest and concern now in regards to Afghanistan is the cancer moving north

          • Oh, and I’ve had a flood of email alerts this morning of deleted comments now approved. Yours amongst them.

          • Daniele I always agree with your comments on here because they are so thoughtful and balanced but to learn the most important lesson about this shambles we must accept NATO has been humiliated, routed, defeated and totally out manoeuvred by men with RPGs.

            We lost the will to continue the fight and no amount of high tech equipment can make up for that.Saying we left will allow our discredited politicians, so called intelligence experts and current and ex military leaders to dodge their responsibilities for all the deaths, money spent and mess they created by staying beyond the initial aim of the intervention.

            Lets use some unpleasant terms, we invaded, became part of an army of occupation and imposed our ways on another culture. That is the harsh reality and those Afghans we are now saving are collaborators! The majority of Afghans obviously didn’t want us.

            Our own media have colluded by muddying the facts, talking more about women’s rights (reflecting our current preoccupations at home) and not questioning U.K. leaders on how we thought with our pitifully small and I’ll equipped military we were going to control a province the size of Helmand.

            What is currently going on is a total shambles and sums up everything about the last 20 years bar the first 12 months or so.

            For most of us on here who respect and back our military it is painful but far less so than for the veterans and their families.My thoughts are with them and the average Afghan at this time

          • spot on!

            The Taliban won.

            We lost.

            To say anything else lets people like Biden and Boris hide their abject failure from their electorate. The west has been badly served by poor leaders for a while now.

          • Mate pretty much spot on, although the idea of controlling Helmand wasnt even in the equation in 2006. Herrick 4 was planned to be a six month stint simply establishing ourselves on the ground, controlling the area in a triangle (ish) between Bastion, FOB Price and Gereshk. This went to plan for about 4 weeks then shit rolled downhill when local Governers upriver were put under pressure by the talibs and head sheds decided we needed to support the local Governers (after they moaned to Kabul and Kabul put pressure on UKPLC) and then penny packet Platoon/Coy groups deployed further up the Helmand Valley, and the rest, as they say is history!

            However in regard to the Afghans not wanting us, correct to a degree, but they also didnt want the Talibs either, and certainly not the foreign extreme versions that cropped up. In fact the average Afghan was quite unconcerned who was cutting about holding power, they just wanted the fighting to stop, to be left alone and to farm, and earn a living. They didnt give a shit about Kabul or even the next district down the river, as you are aware they are a tribal society and the tribe and their immidiate environs was moslty what they cared about. But as you say, a current shambles which will certainly reflect badly on the countries involved. Cheers.

          • Those who hold the field of conflict after the battle are the Victors. The Taliban are now back in control.

            They won.

            We – the West, Lost.

            And just like Vietnam it was the politicians. The military won all the individual battles for the politicos to lose the war.

          • I agree to a point but it was poor military advice that got us drawn into this mess.
            The U.K. military leadership was out of its depth in Helmand and despite the bravery of the individuals involved the scale of the task was way beyond our force levels.

      • Totally agree with that DM ,but would it of been a different result in dealing with the taliban if Iraq didnt take priority or never happened ? I seem to remember them taking a foot hold again when that happened.

        • Who knows. Least of all me. If they don’t come out and fight how to start to defeat an enemy hiding in the mountains and amongst the civil population? A military expert that does not have his hands tied by politicians and the resources to match the task will know.

          Was the same with the Viet Ming.

          Not impossible to defeat them, but with the geography, corruption, afghan tribal mindset, cultural differences, competing warlords, wide open border with Pakistan where the tribal areas are and where supplies and Jihadists entered, general political and ANA incompetence, the USAF bombing wedding processions, constant defence cuts, and our forces operating with hands tied, I really doubt things may have been different.

          They were forced into stalemate. But never gone. We were not beaten either, despite some on the left beating us with that stick.

          In WW2 on the Eastern Front, Field Marshal Von Kleist once suggested the Soviet Union could only be defeated from within. By getting it’s people onside with Germany to depose Communism
          themselves. With some outside prodding to get the ball rolling. They had no love for Stalin and the advancing Wermacht was welcomed. Until the Germans started their genocides under cover of the Partisan War and the “for mother Russia” cause took off. I feel this is the same.

          Even if there was no Iraq, we needed a plan, proper hearts and minds getting the Afghans on side, including the Afghan Taliban amongst them. The more dangerous foreign Taliban excluded.

          I leave the military details to real experts.

          Just my opinions and happy to be corrected.

      • How many times have you heard the phrase “Those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them”. We first tried to pacify Afghanistan in the 1840’s , someone who is a better historian than I will tell us how many Afghan wars we have fought. The only General who came out with colours flying was Roberts in I think 1880. Basically he went into the country mob handed, beat the hell out of any resistance, cut the heads off all the tribal elders and then declared victory and GOT OUT.
        The reason the Taliban have succeeded this quickly is because they have been laying the groundwork for years, talking to the tribal chiefs, paying bribes where needed and gaining the loyalty of each tribe. Our politicians can only think in terms of the next electoral cycle, the Afghans think in generations, and they are patient people.
        I’m willing to bet that most of the provincial governors and administrators are still going to be in post when the dust settles, it’s a different government but there will still be the same opportunities for getting your percentage from the system.
        We have tried to impose our values on a country which does not want them. There will be a lot in the press about the excesses of the Taliban, but I suspect most Afghans will just get on with there lives as before. I am sorry that the women of the country are going to get a rough deal, but the alternative is a never ending occupation by the West, for probably several generations if you want them to think like we do. It’s not going to happen.

        • ” …but the alternative is a never ending occupation by the West, for probably several generations…”

          That what the Roman Empire did, it lasted much longer than the BE!

    • Can I suggest that this may, for many that controlled the will or motivation of others to resist, possibly about the end of the mega cash gravy train. Wouldn’t be surprised if a sizable number of political and military elites end up (are not already) out of country with their families and US$ cash mountains. With diminished opportunity for the gravy train to continue they cut their losses and exit.

    • afghans wisely perhaps do quick risk assessment, which regime has staying power, the western backed govt and army failed the test. a quiet life hopefully even under nasty regime maybe preferable to fighting and social unrest.

    • They are still highly tribal, they dont have the same concept of nationalism that we do, they principally defer to tribal leaders and extended family. They view the Afghan government like we viewed the EU (something weak and over there) rather than something that was part of their daily lives. So when the army was called upon to defend an entity that they didn’t believe in they just ran away.

  4. I recall a Chinook carrying many more than supposed maximum, was it BN during Corporate?

    So no surprise with C17.

    Our Apache also carried more, hanging off the wing stubbs!

  7. The paratrooper capacity is lower than that of carrying, say, leg infantry, because it counts in all the extra gear such as parachutes that is involved in doing airborne operations.

  9. It’s such a tragedy when a nation falls to an ideology of suppression and fear. I do feel very sorry for the women and more enlightened men of Afghan.

    Unfortunately you cannot Impose western liberal values by force as the population itself will rebel and fight tooth an nail ( better your own evil than someone else’s imposed version of good).

    Still my problem with Afghanistan is that we had spend the treasure and payed in blood, just leaving seems disrespectful to all those who suffered from every nation.

    It was always going to take a generation to change the course of a nation. With it getting easier as it goes along. The west has proved it cannot keep focus needed to do this over the timeframes required. Empires can, liberal democracies cannot, So we need to learn what we can and cannot do and not in future waste the treasure and lives trying to change a culture.

  10. What depresses me is there are a lot of people that came public due to the relative freedom offered by the western supported gov, especially females and realistically their deaths are going on be on the west’s hands.

    A pull out was always going to be needed sooner or later but the way it was done was just stupid. I assume the govs of UK/us were given assurances by the Taliban that they could get out and enough time would pass, before the gov would be toppled, so that they couldn’t be blamed, but instead it seems the reverse and it’s clear blame game.

    I will put money on the UK/us gov refusing to release details of deals etc made, citing national security reasons, but the details are needed to be able to judge if the deals were vaguely relastic and took care of the locals

    • There is also the view point that this has happened faster and more easily than the Taliban would ever have dreamed was possible?

      The problem is that if the Taliban don’t move into an areas, once it has been vacated: you end up with a power vaccuum…….and then the problem of reasserting control…….

    • Yes, it was only 640 and that was at capacity. Theres a bit of a difference between people scheduled to be on a flight and those that actually board it.

  15. Max takeoff weight, for millitary aircraft, is normally limited by factors such as density altitude, of course tempreature, available runway length, wind direction relative to the takeoff runway, the surface and slope of the runway and importantly the takeoff risk associated with the task. Typical low risk would call for an after takeoff climb rate exceeding 150 feet per min given an engine failure of one engine at or after V1, thus continueing the takeoff after V1 on three engines for the C17. All these performance paramiters include alteady a redundancy factor of around 20%. With four good engines the C17 crew should not struggle too much at max takeoff weight and even being 10% or so over max takeoff weight.

  16. My question, regardless of the number they can carry in a C-17, is where are they going to put all these people in the long run? Are they going to be put into refugee camps and then given Visas to the U.S.?

  17. Were you also aware that modern day French Airbuses, e.g. A380-800 were designed specifically to be able to carry 800 passengers, assuming everyone only had an economy seat? I learned this from the Airbus factory in Toulouse, France, where they told us that is what the “800” stands for in their above number series. Without seats, one wonders how many more could be carried.
    Perhaps all those planes presently resting in deserts should be used to evacuate a few more people.

  19. Will the US ever win a war.
    I think we should have a good hard look at ourselves before we contemplate taking on China or Russia, otherwise the losses may be incurred inside the UK’s borders.

    • MPs don’t care. They just want to talk about feelings and push for more powers against speech. They will always fail to learn from previous conflicts like our intervention in 1739, I now know why Afganistan is called “the graveyard of the empires”. We have no hope in hell against Russia or China with our current pathetic parties.

    • CORRECTION: A @usairforce C-17 Globemaster III safely transported 823 Afghan citizens from Hamid Karzai International Airport Aug. 15, 2021. This is a record for this aircraft.⁰
      The initial count of 640 inadvertently included only adults. 183 children were also aboard. https://t.co/DL6wP8WTQV

      — Air Mobility Command (@AirMobilityCmd) August 20, 2021

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here