Military Review

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

176
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.
176 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Terenin
    Terenin 11 February 2021 10: 59
    +28
    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)?
    1. bar
      bar 11 February 2021 11: 02
      +4
      Yes, they just envy the striped ones. Their Abrams are hardly capable of rolling in the Arctic.
      1. Terenin
        Terenin 11 February 2021 11: 07
        +5
        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.
        1. mvg
          mvg 11 February 2021 15: 00
          +7
          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.
          1. orionvitt
            orionvitt 11 February 2021 16: 14
            +6
            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.
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 12 February 2021 08: 33
              +3
              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.
              1. Volder
                Volder 16 February 2021 12: 54
                +1
                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.
                1. 3danimal
                  3danimal 16 February 2021 13: 17
                  0
                  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.
                  1. Volder
                    Volder 16 February 2021 14: 43
                    +1
                    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?
                    1. 3danimal
                      3danimal 16 February 2021 15: 06
                      0
                      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.
        2. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 11 February 2021 20: 17
          +9
          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.
          1. KCA
            KCA 14 February 2021 20: 30
            0
            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
        3. 3danimal
          3danimal 12 February 2021 08: 09
          +1
          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.
      2. Pashhenko Nikolay
        Pashhenko Nikolay 11 February 2021 11: 16
        +6
        Why can't they? Or is there not a similar gas turbine?
        1. PROXOR
          PROXOR 11 February 2021 12: 59
          +9
          It seems to me that the point is still in the mass of Abrams, and not in the power plant.
          1. smart ass
            smart ass 12 February 2021 10: 14
            +1
            It's all about urapatriotism
        2. bar
          bar 11 February 2021 13: 22
          +8
          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.
          1. Pashhenko Nikolay
            Pashhenko Nikolay 11 February 2021 14: 37
            +5
            Any tank has nothing to do in a swamp.
          2. Bad_gr
            Bad_gr 11 February 2021 16: 43
            +5
            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.
            1. 3danimal
              3danimal 12 February 2021 06: 38
              0
              There are no levers, no steering wheel, as on all modern all-terrain vehicles.
      3. Ingenegr
        Ingenegr 11 February 2021 12: 01
        +7
        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?
        1. 113262a
          113262a 11 February 2021 12: 27
          +6
          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!
          1. 3danimal
            3danimal 12 February 2021 06: 40
            -2
            It seems to me that self-cleaning cyclones simply purify the air worse.
            1. neri73-r
              neri73-r 12 February 2021 10: 13
              +4
              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. laughing It has long been recognized that the T-80's air purification system is the best in the world.
              1. 3danimal
                3danimal 12 February 2021 13: 03
                +2
                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. request
                1. 113262a
                  113262a 12 February 2021 17: 58
                  +3
                  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!
                  1. 3danimal
                    3danimal 12 February 2021 18: 24
                    -1
                    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.
                    1. 113262a
                      113262a 12 February 2021 22: 39
                      +2
                      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 !.
      4. venik
        venik 12 February 2021 01: 44
        +7
        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"!!!
        1. Lexus
          Lexus 12 February 2021 10: 33
          +1
          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.
          1. Bad_gr
            Bad_gr 12 February 2021 14: 58
            +1
            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. 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.
            1. Lexus
              Lexus 12 February 2021 23: 17
              +3
              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.
          2. venik
            venik 12 February 2021 20: 26
            +1
            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" ... request
            ------
            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

            ========
            belay 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.

            =========
            good 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

            =======
            tongue lol
            1. 113262a
              113262a 12 February 2021 23: 00
              0
              By the way, all the photos are not 80! The door of the KT hatch must open BACK.
              1. venik
                venik 13 February 2021 13: 26
                0
                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!
                1. 113262a
                  113262a 13 February 2021 15: 01
                  0
                  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.
                  1. 113262a
                    113262a 13 February 2021 18: 26
                    0
                    And there are not only pipes, there is a watering can for the exhaust, and a stainless steel tray, in short, a dowry carriage!
                  2. venik
                    venik 13 February 2021 19: 30
                    0
                    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 ??? belay what
                    1. 113262a
                      113262a 13 February 2021 19: 37
                      -1
                      Yes, so there and the tower is not an eighty-nifiga! And Birch is 80; UD.
                      1. 113262a
                        113262a 13 February 2021 19: 49
                        -1
                        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
        2. Intruder
          Intruder 12 February 2021 17: 33
          0
          the fact that the later versions of the "abrashek" were equipped with a system for cleaning the incoming air, frankly "ripped off" from the Soviet 80s!
          not a fact, an elementary borrowing of technical solutions from a potential enemy, as well as in the field of aerodynamics: TsAGI and NASA profiles! wink
      5. private person
        private person 12 February 2021 09: 37
        0
        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.
    2. Mountain shooter
      Mountain shooter 11 February 2021 11: 45
      +5
      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.
      1. hydroy
        hydroy 11 February 2021 12: 37
        +4
        Super, these tanks need to be modernized and extended! T-80 beast!
    3. Lionnvrsk
      Lionnvrsk 11 February 2021 11: 47
      0
      Quote: Terenin
      I still do not understand what the American edition of Military Watch told (provang)?

      Well, read it yourself and form an opinion. hi 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
    4. iouris
      iouris 11 February 2021 12: 18
      +1
      Quote: Terenin
      what did the American edition tell (provang)

      The fact that NATO tanks in the Arctic will not start.
    5. A1845
      A1845 11 February 2021 14: 00
      0
      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
      1. Old tanker
        Old tanker 11 February 2021 14: 13
        +6
        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.
        1. A1845
          A1845 11 February 2021 22: 32
          0
          Thanks for the clarification, but is the production of the GTE going on?
          1. Old tanker
            Old tanker 12 February 2021 06: 41
            +3
            Discontinued in the mid-90s. "Kadvi" is engaged only in overhaul of previously produced ones. But their supply is sufficient at the moment.
            1. A1845
              A1845 12 February 2021 10: 33
              +1
              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
              1. 113262a
                113262a 12 February 2021 22: 47
                +1
                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!
                1. A1845
                  A1845 12 February 2021 23: 07
                  0
                  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 ..
                  1. 113262a
                    113262a 13 February 2021 01: 53
                    0
                    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
    6. Alien From
      Alien From 12 February 2021 03: 13
      0
      As always, nothing)))
    7. svp67
      svp67 12 February 2021 05: 28
      0
      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
      1. Old tanker
        Old tanker 12 February 2021 06: 56
        +6
        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!
        1. svp67
          svp67 12 February 2021 10: 23
          0
          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
          1. Old tanker
            Old tanker 12 February 2021 13: 14
            +1
            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.
            1. svp67
              svp67 12 February 2021 13: 29
              0
              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
              1. Old tanker
                Old tanker 12 February 2021 13: 54
                +1
                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.
                1. svp67
                  svp67 12 February 2021 14: 08
                  0
                  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.
                  1. Old tanker
                    Old tanker 12 February 2021 14: 29
                    +3
                    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.
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 12 February 2021 14: 41
                      0
                      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.
                      1. Old tanker
                        Old tanker 12 February 2021 14: 53
                        +1
                        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.
                      2. svp67
                        svp67 12 February 2021 14: 58
                        0
                        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
                      3. Old tanker
                        Old tanker 12 February 2021 15: 09
                        +1
                        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.
                      4. svp67
                        svp67 12 February 2021 15: 13
                        0
                        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.
                      5. Old tanker
                        Old tanker 12 February 2021 15: 21
                        +1
                        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.
                      6. svp67
                        svp67 12 February 2021 15: 28
                        0
                        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.
                      7. Old tanker
                        Old tanker 12 February 2021 16: 07
                        +1
                        I spoke specifically about the performance characteristics of the rocket. Read carefully.
                      8. svp67
                        svp67 12 February 2021 16: 30
                        0
                        [
                        Quote: Old Tankman
                        I spoke specifically about the performance characteristics of the rocket. Read carefully.

                        And what does it change in this case?
                      9. Old tanker
                        Old tanker 12 February 2021 16: 34
                        +1
                        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.
                      10. svp67
                        svp67 12 February 2021 16: 39
                        0
                        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
                      11. Old tanker
                        Old tanker 12 February 2021 16: 40
                        0
                        It is in this aspect that I spoke. Moreover, more than one already in this thread.
      2. Old tanker
        Old tanker 12 February 2021 15: 12
        +2
        But that's not the point. Missing a flashy shooting is definitely a failure. For objective or subjective reasons, it happened.
  • Vladimir_2U
    Vladimir_2U 11 February 2021 11: 00
    +4
    Are they waiting for reciprocal praise or something to "Abrams"? Will not wait!
    1. Paranoid50
      Paranoid50 11 February 2021 23: 29
      -2
      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. yes True, today something is not enough - a glass, no more, even strange. request
      On other days it can be from a gallon to a tanker - apparently, it depends on the amount of the prepayment. fellow wassat
  • Thrifty
    Thrifty 11 February 2021 11: 00
    +5
    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! hi
    1. 113262a
      113262a 11 February 2021 12: 30
      0
      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.
      1. hydroy
        hydroy 11 February 2021 12: 38
        +2
        and that we need to change to Abrams? T-80 is a good tank for the Arctic and for battle!
        1. 113262a
          113262a 11 February 2021 15: 39
          +3
          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.
          1. Old tanker
            Old tanker 11 February 2021 16: 54
            +3
            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.
            1. 113262a
              113262a 11 February 2021 20: 55
              0
              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.
              1. Old tanker
                Old tanker 12 February 2021 06: 25
                +3
                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.
                1. 113262a
                  113262a 12 February 2021 18: 08
                  0
                  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!
                  1. Old tanker
                    Old tanker 12 February 2021 19: 47
                    0
                    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.
                    1. 113262a
                      113262a 12 February 2021 22: 33
                      0
                      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
          2. Bad_gr
            Bad_gr 11 February 2021 19: 01
            +1
            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.
            1. max702
              max702 12 February 2021 09: 35
              +3
              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.
              1. Bad_gr
                Bad_gr 12 February 2021 11: 27
                -1
                Quote: max702
                APU there norms 16kW

                Can you start the main engine (GTD-1250) with it?
                1. max702
                  max702 12 February 2021 12: 20
                  0
                  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 ..
                  1. Bad_gr
                    Bad_gr 12 February 2021 14: 33
                    0
                    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.
                2. Intruder
                  Intruder 12 February 2021 18: 19
                  0
                  It can be used to start the main engine (GTD-1250)
                  and what is the problem, power is supplied to the gas turbine, the oil is in order, the injectors are working and the pressure is normal on the compressor and in the fuel system !? There is a lot and it is not necessary, the oil consumption is even less for a gas turbine than for piston ones every 5 times, even at a cold start !!!
                  1. Bad_gr
                    Bad_gr 12 February 2021 18: 52
                    0
                    Quote: Intruder
                    and what is the problem, power is supplied to the gas turbine, the oil is in order, the injectors are working and the pressure is normal on the compressor and in the fuel system !?

                    The question is not for me. There are people here who served on these tanks, and they may explain why they did not do this.
                    I hope for an answer.
            2. Old tanker
              Old tanker 12 February 2021 19: 52
              +2
              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.
              1. Bad_gr
                Bad_gr 12 February 2021 20: 45
                +1
                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.
          3. Intruder
            Intruder 12 February 2021 18: 16
            +1
            Start a tank in the ARCTIC, which starts ONLY from accumulators (neither from the pusher nor from the pneumatic start is provided),
            and where we have a gas turbine started without batteries, there are no such on this planet !? laughing And so in a small circle, the oil in the turbojet engine / HPT +50 must be heated with an external inlet and truncated, it is heating without a radiator and an oil tank, and the force of the nozzle flame quickly heats up the engine at the minimum turbine speed - 15 minutes AN-3, against the "heating pad" AN -2, within 2-3 hours in Norilsk, put in his heels of cents (the third generation of metallurgists and the second generation of aviation engineers, just ... wink ) !!!
      2. Vladimir_2U
        Vladimir_2U 12 February 2021 05: 49
        +1
        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.
    2. YOUR
      YOUR 11 February 2021 12: 43
      +1
      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.
      1. spirit
        spirit 11 February 2021 13: 14
        +3
        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.
      2. Old tanker
        Old tanker 11 February 2021 14: 38
        +9
        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.
        1. YOUR
          YOUR 11 February 2021 14: 55
          +2
          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.
          1. Old tanker
            Old tanker 11 February 2021 15: 16
            +6
            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.
            1. YOUR
              YOUR 11 February 2021 15: 40
              +1
              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.
              1. Old tanker
                Old tanker 11 February 2021 17: 24
                +2
                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.
                1. Bad_gr
                  Bad_gr 11 February 2021 19: 06
                  +3
                  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.
                  1. Old tanker
                    Old tanker 12 February 2021 06: 34
                    +1
                    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.
                    1. Bad_gr
                      Bad_gr 12 February 2021 09: 21
                      -1
                      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.
                      1. Old tanker
                        Old tanker 12 February 2021 11: 16
                        +1
                        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.
                      2. 113262a
                        113262a 12 February 2021 18: 11
                        0
                        Then let's remember that the T-80 took off to 105 km!
                      3. Bad_gr
                        Bad_gr 12 February 2021 18: 45
                        0
                        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.
                      4. Old tanker
                        Old tanker 12 February 2021 19: 30
                        0
                        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.
                      5. Bad_gr
                        Bad_gr 12 February 2021 21: 58
                        0
                        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?
                      6. Old tanker
                        Old tanker 13 February 2021 16: 39
                        0
                        They performed out of competition.
                2. Old tanker
                  Old tanker 12 February 2021 19: 19
                  0
                  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.
        2. YOUR
          YOUR 12 February 2021 02: 32
          0
          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
          1. Old tanker
            Old tanker 12 February 2021 06: 37
            +1
            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.
    3. 113262a
      113262a 11 February 2021 21: 19
      0
      Both for the 1100tf GTD and for the 1250, the main fuels are TS-1 and RT. Everything else is substitutes.
      1. Old tanker
        Old tanker 12 February 2021 06: 38
        +2
        You are wrong. For GTD-1250, the main fuel in the RF Armed Forces is diesel fuel.
        1. 113262a
          113262a 12 February 2021 20: 13
          0
          Received in the spring of 85 the first hedgehogs - exactly in the chemotological chart-TS-1 and RT! And there, it is GTD-1250-
          1. Old tanker
            Old tanker 13 February 2021 17: 12
            0
            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
    113262a 11 February 2021 15: 42
    0
    SKOKA_SKOKA refueling? Is it with a trailer?
  • Intruder
    Intruder 12 February 2021 18: 21
    0
    There is practically no oil consumption in the 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.
    exactly, from me +1! Excellent spotted ... winked
  • 113262a
    113262a 11 February 2021 17: 05
    +2
    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
    Free wind 11 February 2021 12: 45
    -1
    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 !!!
    1. Old tanker
      Old tanker 11 February 2021 14: 50
      +3
      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.
    2. Intruder
      Intruder 12 February 2021 18: 26
      0
      And with whom to fight? And where to fight? Where's the fuel
      with penguins, which are probably not there, and the fuel in the nuclear icebreaker fleet will be abandoned, now this is not a problem at all ...! wink
  • Old tanker
    Old tanker 11 February 2021 14: 20
    +5
    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 laughing ).
    As you can see, it is elementary to comply with these requirements.
    1. 113262a
      113262a 11 February 2021 15: 47
      +1
      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!
      1. Old tanker
        Old tanker 11 February 2021 19: 06
        +3
        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.
        1. Old tanker
          Old tanker 11 February 2021 19: 11
          +1
          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.
          1. 113262a
            113262a 11 February 2021 21: 32
            +1
            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.
            1. Old tanker
              Old tanker 12 February 2021 06: 47
              +3
              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 laughing
              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.
              1. 113262a
                113262a 12 February 2021 20: 37
                0
                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
    rocket757 11 February 2021 11: 01
    +4
    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
    RVAPatriot 11 February 2021 11: 04
    +6
    The tank is good, no doubt - greetings from the Soviets!
    1. Nestor Vlakhovski
      Nestor Vlakhovski 11 February 2021 11: 50
      -11%
      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?
      1. Nikon OConor
        Nikon OConor 11 February 2021 12: 02
        +4
        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?
        1. Nestor Vlakhovski
          Nestor Vlakhovski 11 February 2021 12: 10
          -8
          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.
          1. Nikon OConor
            Nikon OConor 11 February 2021 12: 17
            +4
            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
            1. Nestor Vlakhovski
              Nestor Vlakhovski 11 February 2021 12: 24
              -10%
              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.
              1. Nikon OConor
                Nikon OConor 11 February 2021 12: 28
                +3
                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?
                1. Nestor Vlakhovski
                  Nestor Vlakhovski 11 February 2021 12: 34
                  -5
                  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.
                  1. Nikon OConor
                    Nikon OConor 11 February 2021 12: 38
                    -3
                    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
                    1. Nestor Vlakhovski
                      Nestor Vlakhovski 11 February 2021 12: 47
                      -4
                      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)
                    2. Old tanker
                      Old tanker 11 February 2021 14: 59
                      +5
                      At the expense of the better protected T-72, really neighing! Well, why so show your incompetence!
                    3. Intruder
                      Intruder 12 February 2021 18: 28
                      0
                      To the English Channel? Through Europe? Seriously? For this there were T-72s, better protected.
                      fast and with a breeze wink , why try to compare the T-72 with the 80, the tanks are a little different and not only, in terms of the power section ... request
                  2. Old tanker
                    Old tanker 11 February 2021 14: 57
                    +3
                    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.
          2. carstorm 11
            carstorm 11 11 February 2021 12: 17
            +1
            Can you describe how and by what means they protect the coast?) Where do you get the hell out of that?)
            1. Nestor Vlakhovski
              Nestor Vlakhovski 11 February 2021 12: 25
              -4
              Which coastline and from whom are you going to protect?
              1. carstorm 11
                carstorm 11 11 February 2021 12: 27
                +2
                Look at the map and don't ask stupid questions. From whom? There are enough potential opponents.
                1. Nestor Vlakhovski
                  Nestor Vlakhovski 11 February 2021 12: 28
                  -3
                  The only potential enemy in the Arctic is the polar bear.
                  1. hydroy
                    hydroy 11 February 2021 12: 40
                    +6
                    Canada, USA, Norway, Sweden and even China) plus Finns)
      2. Ingenegr
        Ingenegr 11 February 2021 12: 10
        +4
        ??
        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.
        1. Nestor Vlakhovski
          Nestor Vlakhovski 11 February 2021 12: 16
          -1
          "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.
      3. carstorm 11
        carstorm 11 11 February 2021 12: 16
        +5
        And which tank is adapted to this?) Can you google the circular booking of other tanks?)))
  • Nestor Vlakhovski
    Nestor Vlakhovski 11 February 2021 11: 26
    -6
    Does anyone know in general why tanks are needed in the Arctic? To fight with polar bears?
    1. GTYCBJYTH2021
      GTYCBJYTH2021 11 February 2021 11: 54
      +1
      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 ... laughing
      1. Nestor Vlakhovski
        Nestor Vlakhovski 11 February 2021 11: 56
        -3
        You can also destroy the tundra with your geese together with the scum-oilmen, which after that will be restored for centuries.
        1. max702
          max702 12 February 2021 12: 24
          +2
          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 ..
    2. Free wind
      Free wind 11 February 2021 12: 06
      -2
      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.
    3. Nikon OConor
      Nikon OConor 11 February 2021 12: 08
      +4
      With white, but not bears, they seem to be called differently. Norgi, Svei, Litvin, there are many white tribes ...
  • Nikon OConor
    Nikon OConor 11 February 2021 11: 54
    +3
    Since when have the fate of Russian military equipment been decided overseas? Abramov would decide their fate.
  • Ros 56
    Ros 56 11 February 2021 12: 14
    +2
    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.
    1. DWG1905
      DWG1905 11 February 2021 12: 54
      +6
      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.
      1. Ros 56
        Ros 56 11 February 2021 13: 12
        +2
        Oncoming tank battle, you say, lately I have seen only high-altitude transverse battles of UAVs against tanks and, you know, very effective.
        1. Nikon OConor
          Nikon OConor 11 February 2021 19: 08
          +3
          "! 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
      2. Intruder
        Intruder 12 February 2021 18: 34
        0
        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,
        maybe then, to high maneuverability, they will turn their faces, such as wheel structures of the chassis, and strain about improving different KAZs, on armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, like all Western and southern comrades have ..., plus put all kinds of DBMs, only smartly, and not for parades and new foreign customers in export ...!?
    2. Nikon OConor
      Nikon OConor 11 February 2021 19: 04
      +1
      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))
      1. Ros 56
        Ros 56 12 February 2021 06: 57
        0
        And what Medny did not please you, the town is nothing, the population is like that, unmarried weavers make up the majority. laughing 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. hi
        1. Nikon OConor
          Nikon OConor 14 February 2021 20: 29
          0
          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))
  • hydroy
    hydroy 11 February 2021 12: 41
    +4
    T-80 is a good car! Very successful for Arctic conditions!
  • Kapkan
    Kapkan 11 February 2021 13: 56
    +2
    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. laughing
  • Vlad Pervovich
    Vlad Pervovich 11 February 2021 16: 04
    +3
    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
    Mark kalendarov 11 February 2021 20: 47
    +3
    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 ...