In the USA, told about the further fate of the Russian T-80 tank

The Russian T-80 tank, which was put into service 45 years ago, was considered one of the most combat-ready during the Cold War tanks in the world, still remains one of the main tanks of the Russian army. The American edition of Military Watch predicted the future fate of the T-80.

According to the publication, the world's first tank with a gas turbine engine as a power plant, developed during the Soviet era, and currently has a number of qualities that make it one of the most combat-ready tanks in the world.

Despite the fact that the T-80 has been in service for 45 years, the Russian military is not going to abandon it, modernizing the existing fleet. Thanks to its gas turbine engine, the T-80 is most suitable for use in Arctic conditions, where even the newest Russian tanks fail.

The publication notes that currently in service with the Russian army there are about 330 T-80BV tanks of the 1985 modification and 150 T-80BVM tanks of the latest modification. At the same time, the Russian Ministry of Defense is not going to stop the program of modernization of T-80BV tanks to the level of T-80BVM and their supply to the troops.

Another 3000 T-80 tanks, many of which have been upgraded to the BV standard and others to the B variant of the mid-1980s, are currently in storage.

- the text says.

The author of the article is convinced that the unique suitability of the T-80BVM tank for operation in the harsh conditions of the Arctic will allow it to remain in service with the Russian army, at least until the 2040s.

Comments

[Terenin]

In the USA, told about the further fate of the Russian T-80 tank

I still do not understand what the American edition of Military Watch told (provang)?

[bar]

Yes, they just envy the striped ones. Their Abrams are hardly capable of rolling in the Arctic.

[Terenin]

Quote: bar

Yes, they just envy the striped ones. Their Abrams are hardly capable of rolling in the Arctic.

Despite the fact that the USA considers its "Abrams" to be the best tanks in the world, in the Arctic they are completely useless, writes the Chinese agency "Sohu".
The fact is that such combat vehicles are equipped with power plants that cannot function normally in harsh climatic conditions. With a mass of 63 tons, they develop a highway speed of up to 65 kilometers per hour. All these nuances, according to the Sohu agency, will not allow Washington to conduct hostilities in the Arctic region using these machines.

[mvg]

will not allow Washington to fight in the Arctic region

Eskimos and white bears can sleep peacefully. The question is, Why? All recent wars took place much closer to the equator.

[orionvitt]

Quote: mvg

All recent wars took place much closer to the equator

Recently, a serious bickering over the Arctic has begun. So, it's better to be prepared in advance, you never know.

[3danimal]

Because there are hydrocarbon reserves?
So we, for example, will sell them, and with petrodollars we will buy clothes, gadgets, medical equipment, for which the share of profit is higher.
Profit for everyone. It is more profitable to trade.

[Volder]

Quote: 3danimal

So, for example, we will sell them, and with petrodollars we will buy clothes, gadgets, medical equipment,

That is, to raise your standard of living.

[3danimal]

Very well. And manufacturers of expensive clothes, gadgets and medical equipment (with high added value) will improve their standard of living by selling all this to us.
win-win.

[Volder]

Quote: 3danimal

And manufacturers of expensive clothes, gadgets and medical equipment (with high added value) will improve their standard of living by selling all this to us.

This mutually beneficial interaction is the essence of international trade. Or do you think this is bad?

[3danimal]

I don’t think I was talking about a mutually beneficial exchange.

Because there are hydrocarbon reserves?
So we, for example, will sell them, and with petrodollars we will buy clothes, gadgets, medical equipment, for which the share of profit is higher.
Profit for everyone. It is more profitable to trade.

This is all in the context of “they want to seize hydrocarbons from us”. (Silently, at what a monstrous cost).
I pointed to the obviously great benefits of trade exchange.

[voyaka uh]

The Abrams has the same turbine as the T-80.
If the T-80 can be in the Arctic, why can't the Abrams be?
Abrams on training in Norway.

[KCA]

In Norway, the climate, in comparison with the Russian Arctic, is just a southern seaside resort, in January frost in the north of the country, oh, oh, it reaches -2 -4 degrees, at the same time in the south + 10-12, where, say, Yakutsk, with - 58

[3danimal]

equipped with power plants that cannot function normally in harsh climatic conditions

And the T-80 can, with the same power plant. Where is the logic?
And exercises were held in Norway.

With a mass of 63 tons, they develop highway speeds up to 65 kilometers per hour.

And what confuses the author here? 63 tons - this is with a full "body kit" (with KAZ), invulnerable to ATGM.

[Pashhenko Nikolay]

Why can't they? Or is there not a similar gas turbine?

[PROXOR]

It seems to me that the point is still in the mass of Abrams, and not in the power plant.

[smart ass]

It's all about urapatriotism

[bar]

Quote: Pashhenko Nikolay

Why can't they? Or is there not a similar gas turbine?

The turbine is cool. But what about ground pressure? In the Arctic in winter it is usually snow, and in summer, on the contrary, swamps. All the same, 63 tons and 46 tons differ considerably.

[Pashhenko Nikolay]

Any tank has nothing to do in a swamp.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: bar

In the Arctic in winter it is usually snow, and in summer, on the contrary, swamps.

I liked the tank (T-62) to drive in winter: there is no dust, it is clean, the frozen ground holds the car well, so it accelerates faster and listens to the levers well.
But when the dirt ... I do not envy the Abrams crew.

[3danimal]

There are no levers, no steering wheel, as on all modern all-terrain vehicles.

[Ingenegr]

The fact that the gas turbine engine is used as a power plant on the Abrams, as well as on the T-80, does not change anything? Or do American gas turbines operate on other, unknown physical principles?

[113262a]

Abrams has a completely different air preparation system. Filters in the literal sense. Ours have a self-cleaning cyclone system. Although-send eighty to the north-! A bunch of arguments! Who served, he will understand!

[3danimal]

It seems to me that self-cleaning cyclones simply purify the air worse.

[neri73-r]

Quote: 3danimal

It seems to me that self-cleaning cyclones simply purify the air worse.

You can ask the American Abrams mechanics who participated in Operation Desert Storm about this. It has long been recognized that the T-80's air purification system is the best in the world.

[3danimal]

It has long been recognized that the T-80's air purification system is the best in the world.

Best in terms of ease of maintenance or quality of filtration?
Who has compared and recognized?

You ask about this American mechanics Abrams who participated in Operation Desert Storm

But the T-80 never took part in operations of this magnitude in such conditions.

[113262a]

The T-80 was SPECIALLY driven to the Karakum Desert, preparing us for Syria in 83. According to the results, from the whole variety (including the last sixty-two, sixty-fours and seventy-fours, it was the t-80b that was approved for dispatch. In addition, all Germany is solid sand. Where did we end up with the God's chosen then reconciled at the last moment. And all polygons- except for Konigsbrück-Liberose. Eisenach and the tactical fields around his native Zeithain are solid sand! The equipment worked no worse than diesel engines, and in the summer, everything that was not eighty-godlessly boiled on the march!

[3danimal]

In addition, the whole of Germany is solid sand.

Are you talking about?

it was the t-80b that was approved for dispatch

It was the most modern tank at the time.
But since then a lot of water has flowed under the bridge.
And the question of comparing filters remains.

[113262a]

Yes, I mean that the entire Dresden district is on the sand, the largest polygons are Eisneach, Königsbrück, Liberose-Sahara desert is resting (true-Königsbrück-sand with a swamp, the base of the Adolf Hitler division, there is also the All-German training camp-Karakau nearby.) marches shoveled sand from everywhere! For tank roads are also sand !.

[venik]

Quote: bar

Yes, they just envy the striped ones. Their Abrams are hardly capable of rolling in the Arctic.

========
Is it only in the Arctic? By the way, in the desert the 80s didn’t feel so bad !:

At least - certainly not worse than the Abrams! At least, this is evidenced by the fact that on later versions "abrashek" installed a system for cleaning incoming air frankly "ripped off"from the Soviet 80s!
At the time of creation - of equal 80 tanks in the world simply DOESN'T EXIST !!!
Even today, 40 years later (!!!), the "XNUMX" remains one of the BEST tanks in the world! And her modernization potential is HUGE!
PS And now you can "toss slippers off the couch"!!!

[Lexus]

Lying is bad. On your photo is T-90S. Abrams and T-80 have completely different systems for cleaning incoming air: on the first - classic cassette, on the second - cyclonic type. The latter last longer, are serviced less often, but, at the same time, the air is purified worse. The cast turret of the T-80 and the location of the mechanical drive hatch exclude the possibility of any serious increase in the thickness of the frontal armor in accordance with current requirements, and the features of the AZ do not allow the use of modern BOPS capable of penetrating the protection of tanks of a potential enemy at maneuvering angles. As far as I understand, there was not enough money for the commander's panoramic sight - "Mischa ate (C)". Without eliminating these and many other shortcomings, which "will cost a pretty penny", commensurate with the purchase of new machines, the T-80 will never become the best. By the way, many countries bought it and how much? Why do you think? It would be nice to get acquainted with the essence of the issue, and then shrug it off.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: lexus

On your photo T-90S

Quote: lexus

The cast T-80 turret and the location of the mechanical drive hatch exclude the possibility of any serious increase in the thickness of the frontal armor in accordance with current requirements,

Frontal armor of what? If there are hulls, then there are a lot of places ahead. And the filling of what has already been installed can be changed (which has already been done more than once). If there are towers, then it is not sickly instructed there.

 Show / Hide text

Or are there cases of breaking through the tower's forehead?

Quote: lexus

and the features of the AZ do not allow the use of modern BOPS, capable of penetrating the protection of tanks of a potential enemy at the corners of maneuvering.

It is possible to put both the 2A82 and AZ cannon with its bops. It would be the desire of the Ministry of Defense to fork out for its modernization.

[Lexus]

Is it okay that 35 years have passed? The armor protection of the T-80BV (U) was designed to protect the BOPS M829A1 and DM13, and now M829A4 and DM53 are being supplied en masse. Do you think the progress was on the spot? Do the generals of the Ministry of Defense have no desire to check this and send their children into battle on defective tanks? I guess not. I honestly don't understand when it is possible to do something really necessary, but there are always absurd excuses to refuse it. But people's lives are always much more valuable.

[venik]

Quote: lexus

Lying is bad. On your photo is T-90S.

=======
Firstly (about "lies") it's you, "fill in", my friend - perhaps you made a mistake with the photo. Perhaps this is really a T-90 ...
-------

Quote: lexus

Abrams and T-80 have completely different systems for cleaning incoming air: on the first - classic cassette, on the second - cyclonic type.

=======
So it was before .... Now, the latest versions of "Abrams" have a cleaning system fully copied from the "80s" ...
------

Quote: lexus

Cast turret T-80 and the location of the mechanical drive hatch exclude the possibility of any serious increase in the thickness of the frontal armor in accordance with current requirements

========
This is with what "hangover" ???
---------

Quote: lexus

AZ does not allow the use of modern BOPS, capable of penetrating the protection of tanks of a potential enemy at the corners of maneuvering

=======
Yes, yes! True, they forgot to add: "at long distances and in frontal projection" ... Because "Lead" has armor penetration from 2 km - 650 mm (on homogeneous cold-cured steel armor), which of course is not enough ...
---------

Quote: lexus

Without eliminating these and many other shortcomings, which "will cost a pretty penny" commensurate with the purchase of new cars

==========
An extremely dubious and controversial statement ...
-------------

Quote: lexus

The T-80 will never be the best again.

=========
If 45 years after his "birth" he would again become the best in the world - then not only me but everyone else would be very surprised! (By the way, I remember writing NOT "the best in the world", but "one of the best" - seems so?)
----------

Quote: lexus

By the way, many countries bought it and how much?

========
Had many people offered it? For export, the T-80 began to be offered only after the collapse of the Union !!! Before that, even the "friends" in the Department of Internal Affairs were not offered (although they wanted to!).
Export began only in the late 90s, when the car was already over 20 years!!!
In total, more than 600 vehicles have been exported (which, of course, cannot be compared with the export of T-72 and T-90), but also a lot!
So what - using your own terminology:

Quote: lexus

It would be nice to get acquainted with the essence of the question, and then

=======

[113262a]

By the way, all the photos are not 80! The door of the KT hatch must open BACK.

[venik]

Quote: 113262

By the way, all the photos are not 80! The door of the KT hatch must open BACK.

=======
Isn't the KT sunroof rotary?
By the way, and HOW then to understand THIS ?:

There is THAT highlighted in a red oval!

[113262a]

The hatch is swivel, but then the ZPU will be BACK. And the hatch opens at a large angle - you can sit on it! By the way, the non-brothers on Bereza and 64 have a similar gas flue - that is injection cooling Yes, and horses-sized OPVT pipes are also not visible.

[113262a]

And there are not only pipes, there is a watering can for the exhaust, and a stainless steel tray, in short, a dowry carriage!

[venik]

Quote: 113262

non-brothers on Bereza and 64 - then injection cooling

=========
I don’t know what “Birch” is, but the T-64 looks completely different from behind!
--------

Quote: 113262

And the horse-sized OPVT pipes are also not visible.

=========
My friend, what are you? WHAT could there be an OPVT in the DESERT ???

[113262a]

Yes, so there and the tower is not an eighty-nifiga! And Birch is 80; UD.

[113262a]

Тут хорошо видно http://www.gig26.ru/UserFiles/01-anons/222%20(%D0%9A%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%8C).jpg

[private person]

Yes, they just envy the striped ones. Their Abrams are hardly capable of rolling in the Arctic.

Why ride there? There, if anything, there is nowhere to hide.

[Mountain shooter]

Quote: Terenin

I still do not understand what the American edition of Military Watch told (provang)?

The fact that these tanks will be in service for another 20 years. And it is right. The tank is outstanding, and with proper modernization, it is still very combat-ready.

[hydro]

Super, these tanks need to be modernized and extended! T-80 beast!

[Lionnvrsk]

Quote: Terenin

I still do not understand what the American edition of Military Watch told (provang)?

Well, read it yourself and form an opinion. https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/russia-s-t-80-heavy-battle-tank-marks-45-years-in-service-does-this-gas-turbine-combat-monster-have-a-future

[iouris]

Quote: Terenin

what did the American edition tell (provang)

The fact that NATO tanks in the Arctic will not start.

[A1845]

Quote: Terenin

In the USA, told about the further fate of the Russian T-80 tank

I still do not understand what the American edition of Military Watch told (provang)?

they don't read VO https://topwar.ru/28854-osnovnoy-tank-t-80ud-obekt-478b-bereza.html
and they naively think that if the T-80, then it is definitely a gas turbine

[Old tanker]

There are no diesel T-80s in service in Russia. All T-80UDs in the XNUMXs were removed from service, decommissioned and sent to the BHRVT. Most of them have worn out their engines.

[A1845]

Thanks for the clarification, but is the production of the GTE going on?

[Old tanker]

Discontinued in the mid-90s. "Kadvi" is engaged only in overhaul of previously produced ones. But their supply is sufficient at the moment.

[A1845]

Respect to Kaluga engine engineers
it turns out that the UD was removed even before the arrival of the Katrylegheads, so the "suitcases" did not justify themselves?
high hopes were pinned on UD

[113262a]

What hopes are there? The tank, which bows to every bump because of the lousy external haregs on 64B performance of the engine, can be heard 6-7 km away from the loud chainsaw exhaust and heats up in the summer, eats oil in cubic meters. It was on the Shield that we saw our colleagues at 64b. Complete squalor. Although, at 14 we were glad to see him too!

[A1845]

Many tried to tame the brainchild of the hugo Junkers, but apparently not destiny. Two-stroke diesel engines are a song, I remember how Maz 205 were howling on the rise in the era of great construction projects ..

[113262a]

The scheme of maza-funny pictures compared to YuMO. There is just a motor, with a mechanical supercharger, two-stroke. Normal radiator and muffler. And here, turbocharging, and, no muffler, and exhaust gases ejected air cooling radiators .. Hence the disgusting sound. Picture, like BMD1-2, but adjusted for two-stroke

[Alien From]

As always, nothing)))

[svp67]

Quote: Terenin

I still do not understand what the American edition of Military Watch told (provang)?

It carried out a very complex action of "pouring from empty to empty"

The publication notes that currently in service with the Russian army there are about 330 T-80BV tanks of the 1985 modification and 150 T-80BVM tanks of the latest modification.

Where is the T-80U?

Another 3000 T-80 tanks, many of which have been upgraded to the BV standard and others to the B variant of the mid-1980s, are currently in storage.

Before the BV modification, some of the tanks were modernized, but the B modification came only from the factory. And again, they missed the T-80UD tanks, from which the towers are now being removed and installed on the hulls of the old T-80s, after the modernization they receive the T-80UE tanks

[Old tanker]

The T-80UD towers were not mentioned correctly. Further experimental sample T-80UE. it didn't work out. They are not in the troops. And the authors really forgot about the T-80U. Lost sight of the whole Kantimir division!

[svp67]

Quote: Old Tankman

Further experimental sample T-80UE. it didn't work out.

Sample? Here are the footage of 2019 from the "Tank Biathlon", what kind of tanks are the female tank crews performing outside the category, do not tell me

[Old tanker]

Close-up view of the "bald" T-80B. It is difficult to accurately identify the tank model on the track. Even from a photo on the net. Judging by the closed ZPU, it is quite possible that on the machines the towers from the T-80UD. And if these are even experimental T-80UE1 (one of which participated in unsuccessful launches, ATGM), then you cannot call them serial from participation in biathlon. Such vehicles were not supplied to the troops. If you know in what unit and in what quantity they are serving, write, I will be glad of this fact. In 2016, experimental T-72B3s with the Falcon Eye complex for the commander were driven to Biathlon, but they never entered the troops. Do not confuse sports cars with serial military supplies.

[svp67]

Quote: Old Tankman

Judging by the closed ZPU, it is quite possible that

That they are

Quote: Old Tankman

T-80UE1 (one of which participated in unsuccessful launches. ATGM)

Well, his performance is not very unsuccessful. Of the three launches, two hits, given that the effectiveness of this weapon is 0,9, this is quite normal

[Old tanker]

Well, out of three, two, 0,9 does not pull. During my tenure, a miss at even lower level show firing was considered a failure. Now, maybe not.

[svp67]

Quote: Old Tankman

Well, out of three, two, 0,9 does not pull.

?????? Why? Just pulls. Why do anti-aircraft gunners have to calculate the consumption of TWO missiles to hit each flying object, precisely because their coefficient is not 1, close, maybe even 0,99 but not 1.

Quote: Old Tankman

During my tenure, a miss at even lower level show firing was considered a failure.

Here, yes, I agree with you, but what happened happened. Let's see what conclusions will be drawn. For me, the question of putting into production and re-equipping tanks with new KUV has been ripe for so long.

[Old tanker]

Because 2 out of three is 66,7%.
And the overall result of the shooting was generally 8 out of 16 !!!
Ksiati T-72B3 with the use of "Pine" performed three out of three. But tanks with old sights T-90A - 1/3, T-80U - 1/3, T-80UE1 - 2/3.
But the point is not in the complexes, but in the preparation of ekmpages. Moreover, in such greenhouse conditions. From a place to a stationary target with good visibility. Trained guys and ancient 9K112 on T-80BV got to the shows. And there there are many times more problems in the preparation and KUV of the missile than in 9K119.

[svp67]

Quote: Old Tankman

Because 2 out of three is 66,7%.

This is the general percentage, and there we are talking about the effectiveness of weapons.

[Old tanker]

about the coefficient of effectiveness of the weapon.

An interesting notion of what goes into it. The performance characteristics of the Reflex missile are clearly written - the probability of hitting a target such as a tank is 0,8.

[svp67]

Quote: Old Tankman

An interesting notion of what goes into it.

And then it is invested that 8 out of 10 missiles are guaranteed to hit the target

[Old tanker]

Well, in my opinion, the probability of a missile hit and the coefficient of the effectiveness of a weapon are not the same.
The coefficient of effectiveness of a weapon is clearly a broader concept.

[svp67]

Quote: Old Tankman

The coefficient of effectiveness of a weapon is clearly a broader concept.

Not. In this case, they are combined and this value is not constant, it can vary depending on the situation.

[Old tanker]

The missile hit probability is the accuracy of the ammunition hit. And the coefficient of effectiveness of a weapon is the ability of a weapon, as a complex of sighting devices and a barrel (ate primitively), to send ammunition exactly to the target.
The effectiveness of the weapon itself does not change from the situation - this is a tabular value. The effectiveness of its application is changing. These are two different things.

[svp67]

Quote: Old Tankman

The missile hit probability is the accuracy of the ammunition hit.

No, in the performance characteristics the value is indicated not for the rocket, but for the entire Guided Weapons Complex in normal weather conditions during the day.

[Old tanker]

I spoke specifically about the performance characteristics of the rocket. Read carefully.

[svp67]

[

Quote: Old Tankman

I spoke specifically about the performance characteristics of the rocket. Read carefully.

And what does it change in this case?

[Old tanker]

Basically nothing. I'm talking about Thomas, and you about Erema.
And in fact, initially, the conversation was generally about the unsuccessful ostentatious shooting of the TUR from the T-80UE1 tank at the Army-2020.
And our verbal ping-pong will not affect this fact in any way.

[svp67]

Quote: Old Tankman

And in fact, initially, the conversation was generally about the unsuccessful ostentatious shooting of the TUR from the T-80UE1 tank at the Army-2020.
And our verbal ping-pong will not affect this fact in any way.

Yes, it is UNSUCCESSFUL, but only in the aspect of the fact that it was at demonstration firing, and so the shooting from this tank is quite consistent with the performance characteristics

[Old tanker]

It is in this aspect that I spoke. Moreover, more than one already in this thread.

[Old tanker]

But that's not the point. Missing a flashy shooting is definitely a failure. For objective or subjective reasons, it happened.

[Vladimir_2U]

Are they waiting for reciprocal praise or something to "Abrams"? Will not wait!

[Paranoid50]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Are they waiting for reciprocal praise or something to "Abrams"? Will not wait!

Already waited - a little higher than their Israeli admirer "warrior" on duty poured boiling water. True, today something is not enough - a glass, no more, even strange.
On other days it can be from a gallon to a tanker - apparently, it depends on the amount of the prepayment.

[Thrifty]

It is a rare case when I agree with the Yankees - according to the reviews of those who served on the T80, the tank is really very good, perhaps too "demanding" in something, but for our Northern latitudes there was no better tank, and it won't be for a long time!

[113262a]

The one who served and considers the 219r to be the best tank of all time, send it to the slaughter for our Northern latitudes - the height of amateurism! Breakthrough tank - not for frost! If there is no warm box. By the way, the Swedes and Finns still start Abrams in winter.

[hydro]

and that we need to change to Abrams? T-80 is a good tank for the Arctic and for battle!

[113262a]

Start a tank in the ARCTIC, which starts ONLY from the accumulators (neither from the pusher nor from the pneumatic start is provided), which quickly lose capacity in the cold. In 85, at -30 out of 10 cars, three started up, and already from them, the whole company. Despite the fact that the BMP-2 had already started up and left for the reserve area. But in the summer in the sands of Germany he was in his element. Weak lugs in winter are like summer tires, and at 20 frost, the RMS of the caterpillars dubs to the point that the caterpillar becomes a hump. I suspect that at 50 frost, the RMSh and roller tires and track pads will simply split.

[Old tanker]

From the three tanks, the remaining 7 (and this is if you do not start another tank from the just "lit" one) were "lit" for so long that the BMP-2 had time to warm up the engines with a heater and start? At -30 it will take them at least half an hour. "Light up" eighty minutes 2-3. And this is taking into account the connection and disconnection of the external trigger wires. Somewhere you are dissembling. Either the temperature was not so low and the BMPs were not warmed up before launch, or the tankers were in no hurry at all. After all, even with one (!) Set of wires, 15 tanks can be launched in 7 minutes.

[113262a]

Yes, my friend, just combat training (2 pieces) and one car in the boxing of a combat company (8 pieces) were launched. But the problem is that what started up was in the second row. And the snot from there was enough only for the cars next to it. While the back row was wound up consecutively (the company commander did not want to throw out the back wall of the boxing!) - the motorized rifle battalion warmed up and drove off. And we, the textbooks, started the front row and went to load the BC ourselves.

[Old tanker]

Of course, you are not aware of the existence of a "pill" (a connecting socket for external trigger wires). Very few people know about it. She comes with a group set of spare parts for the company. But the fact that there are holes on the contacts of the wires for connecting them simply with bolts is known to everyone except your company commander. By the way, a good repairman always has a pair of wires for "lighting" cars that have started up on alarm. Yes, and it seems to me that this is the problem, not the battery. They were not stupidly followed. Therefore, back in Soviet times, transformers for powering batteries with microcurrents directly in the tank were invented for rotozeans back in Soviet times. And there is also a so-called buffer group for external triggering. This is such a special box on wheels for 4 batteries with a control panel. She launches 3-4 T-80 tanks one after the other. If it were you would have no problems launching the first row. It was possible to start all of it, but one would be enough. However, your company commander and in the buffer group could well have discharged batteries.

[113262a]

Well, there was no such beauty in the GSVG in 83-85t. And in the training school in Elan, there were also no microcurrents and other nishtyaks! Regular snot cables were in the zip of each car in the right front box. By the way, the company was the best in the regiment! But just at 85 in winter, 30 degree frosts hit and the battery just froze- those that are fighting. Ubm-worked every day and survived!

[Old tanker]

Yes, "snot" in the first zip. And there were no bolts and nuts either? Didn't you have enough brains to connect two sets of pains with pains from two groups with a toggle switch on the rosette back?
Looks like a little you were tugged on alarm.
Well, now all these nishtyaks (micro-currents, the fuzzy group) have been around for a long time. So there are no problems with launching in the Arctic.
I did not know that in the land of Elani mosquitoes, there were 80s. I'll take a note.

[113262a]

They pulled a little, just two general secretaries glued the flippers together, but the defense ministers were changed like gloves! And twice during the period-azimuth 666 (and this is a war!) With access to the reserve and twice during the service of the foreman managed to pour kerosene on all the mattresses. It's good that they didn't set fire on schedule. Even something that could no longer ride left - the rembat on ties cleaned everything up! Textbooks loaded BC to capacity. This is not to mention Shield-84, after which they could easily drink some water from the English Channel! This is not counting divisional, regimental and battalion exercises and various window dressing

[Bad_gr]

Quote: 113262

starts ONLY from batteries ...

In my opinion, the APU is more powerful than the one that is normally installed on the 80s. Launched the APU, and from it the main turbine was already launched. As in aviation, it is not a problem there.
And similar, mobile generators in parts would not be at all superfluous: they fitted them to the tank, inserted the plug into the outlet, and supplied the required voltage to the tank with sufficient current to start the engine.

[max702]

The APU there is 16kW (Auxiliary power plant GTA-18A.) It's just that they are far from being at all, which must be corrected during modernization without fail ..

.. We constantly confuse poor maintenance with product design.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: max702

APU there norms 16kW

Can you start the main engine (GTD-1250) with it?

[max702]

In theory, it should be so differently for what? And so, respectively, for charging the battery and powering electrical appliances on the tank .. Is it possible to directly power the gas turbine engine starter from the APU, do not say, you need to ask those who served on this equipment ..

[Bad_gr]

Quote: max702

In theory, it should be so differently for what?

According to the information that came across to me - its power is not enough. And among the problems of starting the GTD-1250 in severe frost, when the battery power is not enough, such a launch option (from the APU) was not mentioned here.

[Old tanker]

This is how the T-80U was launched in the Kantemrovskaya division. First GTU, and from it already GTE. saved the battery resource. They had an ironclad rule.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: Old Tankman

This is how the T-80U was launched in the Kantemrovskaya division. First GTU, and from it already GTE.

Thanks for the information.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: 113262

By the way, the Swedes and Finns still start Abrams in winter.

Abrams from Swedes and Finns are an indicator! An indicator of your poor knowledge of the issue.

[YOUR]

Eats too much. On the highway 5 liters per 1 km of track, on a dirt road up to 8 liters, i.e. for 100 km 800 hp It must be understood that at low temperatures, the flow rate will increase even more.
According to the experience of the exercises, the average fuel consumption per 100 km for the 80 was 642 liters. This is in Belarus, in the summer.
In terms of armament, it practically does not differ from T72, from T90.

[spirit]

Yeah, and at one time it cost much more than the same 72, and with a modern engine on 72, it is not particularly superior in power.

[Old tanker]

The fuel consumption rate for the T-80 without surcharges is 7,5 liters per 1 km. For the T-80U I will not say, I did not serve on them. But the norm is less there. For T-72 4,3 liters per 1 km.
But! Everyone forgets about oil consumption for waste in our diesel engines. In old worn-out diesel engines, it is generally catastrophic. And the power reserve for them is considered not only for fuel, but also for oil. In addition, the consumption of antifreeze is small, but it is available, as in all cooling systems. But he is more than in a car. There is practically no oil consumption in a gas turbine engine.
So if you count the price of TS-1 (or reserve diesel fuel) per 1 km and compare it with the price of diesel fuel + M-16IHP-3 + antifreeze, then the difference will be small.
For example, on the T-80U, the fuel consumption is lower and there is the main diesel fuel, and not the TS-1.
It is not so much a matter of high fuel consumption as of the high price of the GTE itself and the high cost of its overhaul. At the beginning of the 500s, the overhaul price was around XNUMX thousand rubles.

[YOUR]

Refueling means a lot. How many T80 refueling, if I'm not mistaken 4 tons. I ran 300 km along the gully rivers and crayfish with heating and ... hey, drive a tank of kerosene there. Not a relatively cheap diesel fuel, but give kerosene. There, naturally, the engine is multi-fuel, but other fuel will fly into the pipe at an even higher speed. So fuel consumption is not an unimportant aspect.
Read documents, memories of the war, how many equipment were abandoned precisely for this reason, the lack of fuel.

[Old tanker]

1840 liters.
Nothing will fly into the pipe. It's just that the power drops a little on a diesel engine. And this is only for the GTD-1000, the main fuel is kerosene. The main fuel for GTD-1250 is diesel.

[YOUR]

Here's your answer. With a fuel consumption of 640 liters per hundred, this is not the maximum. The tank will cover 250 km. if the tank is dry. This is not just a little it is very little.
But in low temperatures, such a tank is still preferable. Diesel oil, even one that is YES, if it is not enough in the tank at a temperature of -35 -40 will become jelly. In order to avoid this, the tank will have to be constantly heated. Same problem.

[Old tanker]

Without additional barrels, the T-80 will travel 7,5 km at a flow rate of 250 liters per km. The T-72 will pass 280 without additional barrels. The difference of 30 km is not so critical.
And this is according to the established norms. But it all depends on the driver. A normal one will get savings on any tank, and a stupid one will burn everything half way.

[Bad_gr]

And at high speeds, the T-80 consumes comparable to the T-72. And when they arrived, they were in position, the T-80 extinguishes the main engine and starts the APU, spending less than the same T-72, which turns its generator (for the operation of all the tank's electronics) with its main engine, consuming its motor resource.

[Old tanker]

APU only on T-80U, not the most massive of the family. The others do not have it.
By the way, I must also say that the speeds of the T-80 are unattainable for the T-72 and the dynamics of the machines is incomparable.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: Old Tankman

By the way, I must also say that the speeds of the T-80 are unattainable for the T-72 and the dynamics of the machines is incomparable.

T-72B3M at biathlon recorded speed of 82 km / h.

[Old tanker]

Biathlon is a race of sports tanks. Without full b / k, refueling and spare parts, that is, without the full curb weight of the car.
The combatants fully equipped with the T-80 on a good gravel road or dirt road quite reached such speeds on the march.

[113262a]

Then let's remember that the T-80 took off to 105 km!

[Bad_gr]

Quote: 113262

Then let's remember that the T-80 took off to 105 km!

Tank biathlon takes place on the ground, and the biathlon tank has the same engine (B-92S2, 1130 hp). as on all T-2018B72M upgraded from 3 going to the troops. The fact that the tank is not loaded in the competition is there, but to level it with a tank (most likely, the same completely lightweight), which is rolling on flat concrete ... Then, with a tank that flies inside the plane: in relation to the ground he will have a speed of about 760 km / h (if he is flying inside the Il-76)
By the way, remember the girls who performed on the T-80 - something is not heard about the speed records of the polygon.

[Old tanker]

And the girls were tasked with achieving a record?
And yes, when we drove along the take-off of Khankala, I had full tanks, full MZ (the tank rack is empty, I confess) instead of 3 boxes of ammunition for NSVT, 5. In the basket instead of a tarpaulin there is a full pile of boxes for the shooter (5,45 , 7,62, 12,7). On top of the OPVT pipe, above the AT-1 boxes, there are two boxes from tank shots with a dry ration. And the whole tank is covered with helicopter pilots. Didn't count, but more than 10 for sure.
So the car was clearly overloaded. They rushed so that at the joints of the airfield slabs that the reinforced rubber bulwarks fluttered like the wings of a butterfly. Over a hundred for sure.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: Old Tankman

And the girls were tasked with achieving a record?

In the sense of ? The task of taking a prize (ideally the first one) allows that driving on the highway will be unhurried?

[Old tanker]

They performed out of competition.

[Old tanker]

I had this in Khankala in 96. True, the helicopter pilots (whom they rolled) filled 108 liters of the supply tank (specially leaked) with their real fuel. They were crazy about the speed of the tank, and so am I.

[YOUR]

Never used tanks, in this regard, a sofa tanker. But for all performance characteristics the range of the T-72 is 500 km, and for the T-80 in terms of performance characteristics - 350 km

[Old tanker]

Look above what I wrote. There, the calculation of the mileage of both cars in accordance with the established fuel consumption rates. The norms are taken for GTD-1000TF and V-84.

[113262a]

Both for the 1100tf GTD and for the 1250, the main fuels are TS-1 and RT. Everything else is substitutes.

[Old tanker]

You are wrong. For GTD-1250, the main fuel in the RF Armed Forces is diesel fuel.

[113262a]

Received in the spring of 85 the first hedgehogs - exactly in the chemotological chart-TS-1 and RT! And there, it is GTD-1250-

[Old tanker]

Took in the spring of 85

Much water has flowed under the bridge since then.
For a long time already on the GTD-1250 the main fuel is diesel.

[113262a]

SKOKA_SKOKA refueling? Is it with a trailer?

[113262a]

On the intersection of the GSVG (sand), the mileage without barrels, only on the internal and external tanks, is 450 km. Everything from the driving style, if the mechanic cuts in, as taught in the tutorial 2/3 with manual gas and drives on one PCA-consumption is wild. If you work from the gas pedal, the consumption is minimal. For movement, 30% manual is enough. And the noise is an order of magnitude less - a tank passes by, if you stand with your back, you will notice only on the ROAD OF THE EARTH, when 42,5 tons pass by.

[Free wind]

And what is it better than anyone else for our northern heights? And with whom to fight? And where to fight? Where to get fuel? On one launch, 50-80 liters of fuel, heated up by 50 liters, fly out. So the box must be warmed up and the hodovka, in short they ask for denyushka. In the North, it is dangerous to move off the road and on snowmobiles, on tractors without reconnaissance of the path, no one will ever leave the road. The tank will go into the swamp there, no one will find it. The military wants their own epaulets and money. I remembered something about fuel consumption. Sitting in the car, I read a book on this car In the eightieth year. The fuel consumption according to the book seemed interesting (the books came with each car), 10-12 liters per 100 kilometers. ZAZ cars !!!

[Old tanker]

On one launch, 50-80 liters of fuel, heated up by 50 liters, fly out.

Where did you get such stupidity?
A little more than 1 liter of fuel is consumed to start. If you do not believe, you can read it yourself. Hour of work on site on 2 groups of nozzles 70 liters. Start cycle GTD-1000TF 55 seconds. Fuel injection is carried out at 12-15 seconds.
Warming up the boxes to start driving is not required. If there are severe frosts of 20 and below, it takes 5-7 minutes to warm up the engine and transmission oil.
In total, for a gas turbine engine, the readiness to drive in severe frosts is no more than 10 minutes, for a diesel engine, for 40-45 minutes, only warm it up with a heater. In addition, on T-72 / T-90 (T-64 too), if the mechanic did not double pump oil from the gearboxes before turning off the car in winter, you will not start it until you drain the oil from the boxes.

[Old tanker]

The T-80 is picky about only three points:
- good battery charge for starting the engine;
- free access of air to the engine;
- and in winter to fuel without water (ice in the HP-1000FM leads to shearing of the pump drive roller, but if the tank is not muffled, then don't care ).
As you can see, it is elementary to comply with these requirements.

[113262a]

Here in the battery, all the joy! One of the 4 die-and-all-snot or tug is enough! During the exercises, even the p-123 was turned off, so God forbid the batteries did not run out in winter. Rescued the deputy engineer at IMR. He started up ALWAYS!

[Old tanker]

No need to sing war songs.
The T-80 starts up quietly from the top two batteries. With their normal charging, it is enough for 1-2 unsuccessful startup cycles and for the 3rd successful one.

[Old tanker]

Dexterous was the assistant. Not everyone will be able to "light" a T-80 without a control wire from two groups. By the way, if the source machine has weak batteries, then without the control wire you still can't start a T-80 consumer.

[113262a]

Control wires are duplicated by a toggle switch. Or AZR right next to the battery compartment. For such cases, right behind the mechanic's dashboard. They also started up from the snot of the BMP-2 - there a mighty generator pulls welding. But about the start-up from two batteries-fairy tales-the initial current of the starter-generator is about 1000 amperes per spin.

[Old tanker]

Well, then we have the whole division (31td / 3 mfd) made a fairy tale come true.
On some machines, in view of the killed battery or stupidly, there were 2 or two bottom dead, but without jumpers so that they would not be pulled over. A good pair of batteries is enough for 1-2 starts.
But what is there from the BMP, from the battery in the Urals with good batteries. Yes, and not that happened. But these are fairy tales for you
He served on the T-80 for 18 years. Of these, 2 years as a platoon combat training group and 4 years as a battalion deputy technical officer. So how to handle the T-80, well, I know very well.
Even without the RT, the T-80 starts up, but under what conditions not all experienced colleagues know about it. The experience of communicating with breeders helped me.

[113262a]

Just took the first hedgehogs in 85. .Not zampotekh, but tank commander, 23 TP, Zeithain, GSVG. ... Commissioned under the leadership of both Leningrad and Omsk. .After us, the wardens from the local school sat down in our place. We were trained in Elani for work in Syria, a battalion of two training regiments. Tank commanders are only conscripted tech students. Exams in training were not passed for bacon. It was not that time. Only three Cobras shot. And this is just a tutorial. Established-not measured! Certainly more than I shot with inserts. In the troops, and then one spout per snout was given in Konigsbrück for a show for the German fascist comrade cadets. So I know the materiel and still remember!

[rocket757]

The technology created in the USSR does not have a short century. Many samples are for sure!
The base is good, but modernization is the concern of the descendants of those designers who created it!

[RVAPatriot]

The tank is good, no doubt - greetings from the Soviets!

[Nestor Vlakhovski]

What is good then?
The fact that it is not suitable for anti-tank combat with opponents from NATO (for which it was originally created)?
Or the fact that, with its cardboard circular armor, it is not suitable for modern warfare, where danger most often flies from above, below or to the side?

[Nikon O'Conor]

the tank is suitable for operation in the far north, conditions of nuclear weapons impact.
If other tanks aren't good enough, what kind of anti-tank combat? You beat WoW?

[Nestor Vlakhovski]

The tank may be suitable for at least exploration on Mars, but this is not an argument to send it there. What is the T-80 doing in the Arctic? What for, and most importantly, why is he needed there?
What the hell is nuclear weapons ?!
At the time of adoption and serial production of the 70-90s, it was MBT with sub-caliber shells that were considered the only effective anti-tank weapon. I don’t play tanks and I don’t advise you.

[Nikon O'Conor]

That's right !, I don't play either. But the T-80 is a tank - operating under these conditions.
Has your concept of using tanks not changed since 42? oncoming tank combat is the past. Tank - first of all, at the moment, suppression of fortified enemy positions, and last but not least, anti-tank warfare

[Nestor Vlakhovski]

I did not speak about my concept at all, this is a separate topic.
But the Soviet tactics from the 40s to the 80s did not undergo significant changes, it is enough to watch the video of the Soviet exercises and listen to the CA marshals who dreamed of tank avalanches (and NATO opponents were preparing for anti-tank barriers from heavy MBT).
In the previous commentary, I spoke about the past, the T-80 was initially not suitable in its main incarnation, in the niche that the generals prepared for it, and in modern realities its value is an even bigger question. This car can not be called good.

[Nikon O'Conor]

Damn, imagine the 80s ... No country in the world has tanks suitable for the far north. The USSR has them.
Thought to develop further or already?

[Nestor Vlakhovski]

The T-80 became the northern one already in the 2010s, and in Soviet times these tanks served in the GSVG and ZVO. It was the T-80 that was supposed to rush to the English Channel.

Thought to develop further or already?

There is nothing to develop here. Far-fetched.

[Nikon O'Conor]

To the English Channel? Through Europe? Seriously? For this there were T-72s, better protected.
To hell with this discussion. Your links, arguments ..
If not, goodbye

[Nestor Vlakhovski]

Through Europe? Seriously?

It is now far from the English Channel, and at that time only West Germany, Benelux and France blocked the path. So a tank with impressive dynamic characteristics and a soft suspension was created for the SA, which could reach the Atlantic coast in a couple of marches. The T-72 is a cheap mobilization tank, the combat characteristics of which were initially rated low.
You yourself did not provide any links to demand something))) At least my information is easily checked for reliability, and your fantasies about the "northern tank" are just something)

[Old tanker]

At the expense of the better protected T-72, really neighing! Well, why so show your incompetence!

[Old tanker]

At the end of the Union, the T-80s were in the Polar Pechenga. And at the very beginning of the 90s, either before the collapse of the USSR, or immediately after, the T-80U battalion set arrived in Kamchatka.

[carstorm 11]

Can you describe how and by what means they protect the coast?) Where do you get the hell out of that?)

[Nestor Vlakhovski]

Which coastline and from whom are you going to protect?

[carstorm 11]

Look at the map and don't ask stupid questions. From whom? There are enough potential opponents.

[Nestor Vlakhovski]

The only potential enemy in the Arctic is the polar bear.

[hydro]

Canada, USA, Norway, Sweden and even China) plus Finns)

[Ingenegr]

??
And how, for example, from arriving

Quote: Nestor Vlahovski

top, bottom or side

protected "Abrams", "Leopards" and any other "Merkavas"? All of them have differentiated, like Soviet-Russian cars, booking.

[Nestor Vlakhovski]

"Abrams" with "Leopard-2" at least hold their foreheads confidently, and both from ATGMs and from Soviet sub-caliber shells + in upgrades they received mine protection, side screens, now KAZ is being actively introduced.
"Merkava", starting from the third model, received full-fledged all-aspect armor.

[carstorm 11]

And which tank is adapted to this?) Can you google the circular booking of other tanks?)))

[Nestor Vlakhovski]

Does anyone know in general why tanks are needed in the Arctic? To fight with polar bears?

[GTYCBJYTH2021]

Quote: Nestor Vlahovski

Does anyone know in general why tanks are needed in the Arctic? To fight with polar bears?

Protect the Northern Sea Route when the ice melts and the tundra too ... then the tanks will get stuck, turning into bunkers ...

[Nestor Vlakhovski]

You can also destroy the tundra with your geese together with the scum-oilmen, which after that will be restored for centuries.

[max702]

Quote: Nestor Vlahovski

You can also destroy the tundra with your geese together with the scum-oilmen, which after that will be restored for centuries.

Modern research has proven the opposite just in the ruts of tracked vehicles and the richest and fastest development of the tundra flora is taking place, which turned out to be a surprise for scientists who previously thought differently ..

[Free wind]

The bears are becoming really insolent, and as if they need to be shot, but we have zoo ---- defenders !!!! Guys, slapped the bear. do not shoot it, do not throw it on the internet. I understand that these bears are potential cannibals who are not sleeping in January, but the prosecutor's office will primarily deal with you.

[Nikon O'Conor]

With white, but not bears, they seem to be called differently. Norgi, Svei, Litvin, there are many white tribes ...

[Nikon O'Conor]

Since when have the fate of Russian military equipment been decided overseas? Abramov would decide their fate.

[Ros 56]

Stupid publication with stupid articles. It is clear to the most narrow-minded, incompetent person, how twice two is equal to four, that regardless of when the technique was created, it is constantly undergoing modernization, if this is required of course. And under this magic word - modernization, anything can be hidden. We know from the history of aviation that the MI-8 appeared after the deepest modernization of the Mi-4, and the Tu-22mZ appeared after the same modernization of the Tu-22. So it is not these striped ones to talk about the depth of modernization of our tanks.

[DWG1905]

And who canceled the oncoming tank battle? And what area of ​​the frontal projection actually holds anti-tank weapons in Abrasha and Leo, Abrasha is especially interesting. And most importantly, how many of them are actually on the move in Europe, the numerical superiority has not yet been canceled, 1000 T-80 and T-72 will gore 250 Leo-2s anyway, or how many of them do the Germans and the Poles have? What is the real average possibility of a direct shot in the European theater of operations, if memory does not change much less than 3000 m. In a duel situation, everything is decided by the training of personnel. And then the tanks should be used en masse, for this our MBT and sharpened. If a tank army enters a breakthrough, only another tank army will help. If you fight in local conflicts, where tanks are used piece by piece, you need to make heavy vehicles of the Merkava type and get rid of the railway gauge, otherwise the Armata will get longer and longer, but you need to strive for a square.

[Ros 56]

Oncoming tank battle, you say, lately I have seen only high-altitude transverse battles of UAVs against tanks and, you know, very effective.

[Nikon O'Conor]

"! Oncoming tank".
So I say that people either got stuck in 1942, or have no idea about the use of tanks in combat conditions.
Now (after Grozny) a tank will not be driven into a large village, and the oncoming tank lava (if there are such gifted ones) will be covered, at least, by MLRS

[Nikon O'Conor]

Paint)) I thought recently that I would visit your city, but did not get there. Our object was in Mednogorsk, this is a hole !!! Honestly, I don't even know why we did a music school there on 2 floors ... I would like to open another one there ...
Sarcasm))
With respect))

[Ros 56]

And what Medny did not please you, the town is nothing, the population is like that, unmarried weavers make up the majority. Well, about the weavers, of course I had enough, it was more related to Orenburg, but in Soviet times the city was famous for its Uralets vacuum cleaners, well, they traded copper with gold and sulfur. Been there more than once, even went there to a friend's wedding. He has a wife from there, so they decided to have some fun there so that her numerous relatives would not be particularly stressed.

[Nikon O'Conor]

No, of course I have been to other cities, like Bely in Tula, there are even buildings with holes from Nazi shells, and in the vicinity of the village they heat stoves with peat. But Mednogorsk ... - expected the best. The first impression of entering the city is "damn it !!! a huge pit !, (smog) what do they breathe?", The second: (we go early in the morning on January 3) Damn do people live here at all?)))) And then, well, a big village ... even more than towns in central Russia))

[hydro]

T-80 is a good car! Very successful for Arctic conditions!

[Kapkan]

In the USA, told about the further fate of the Russian T-80 tank

Some kind of deja vu ... Again, someone talks about the further fate of something OUR ...
Amazing.

[Vlad Pervovich]

Quote: mvg

will not allow Washington to fight in the Arctic region

Eskimos and white bears can sleep peacefully. The question is, Why? All recent wars took place much closer to the equator.

there gas and oil were found on the shelf

[Mark kalendarov]

I snapped at one heading: "The USA told about the further fate of the Russian T-80 tank." What? Putin became the President of the USA or Shoigu theirs Minister of Defense ?? !!!
Yes ... A long nose is not a long penis. Apart from laughter, nothing causes ...