Light at the end of the tunnel: domestic tank engines

280
Light at the end of the tunnel: domestic tank engines
2B-12-3A at Army-2023


V-shape story


Currently the main tank The engines of the Russian army are V-92S2 and V-92S2F. The first is for the engine-transmission compartment of the T-72B3M, the second is for the T-90M “Proryv”. For the “seventy-two” the engine power is 1 hp. s., for “Breakthrough” - by 000 liters. With. more. The 130 hp gas turbine engine stands out. With. for T-1BVM.



According to the latest data, in Omsk they intend to resume production of the famous “flying tank” from scratch - now the BVM series is mainly produced on the basis of vehicles removed from storage. This means that GTD-1250 will soon be in great demand. This, by the way, is a greeting to everyone who buried the T-80BVM before the special operation.

Let's digress a little from the diesel topic and try to figure out why the production of a gas turbine tank should be restored. Is there really not enough capacity in Nizhny Tagil?

In the Urals everything is in order, they work rhythmically and cope with the load - the problem is precisely the T-80BVM power plant. Of the entire line of Russian tanks, it is the gas turbine that provides the necessary throttle response and high maximum speed, which is one of the important conditions for survival in the northeast military zone.

Approach the firing position, shoot off the ammunition and roll back - the faster, the less chance of getting under return fire. This works best in vehicles with high power density, for which the T-80BVM has no competitors.

No one is interested in the excessive gluttony of a gas turbine engine. This could have been critical in the early stages of the special operation, when there were tank breakthroughs, but now this is not relevant. The defensive nature of combat operations offsets the advantage of diesel vehicles in fuel consumption. The average daily mileage of a tank is tens of kilometers.

As a result, the main virtue of tanks is their high power density.

The trouble with the situation is that deep modernization of the honored and legendary B-2 is impossible. With a high degree of probability it can be stated that the V-92S2F for Proryv is the final version of the engine, the pedigree of which goes back to the early 30s of the last century. The B-2 variation will definitely celebrate its centenary in one of the engine and transmission compartments of the domestic tank.


V-92S2F. Source: odetievbrony.ru

The only question that remains is - how did it happen that the tank forces are still exploiting the descendants of the B-2?

Turning to stories.

The first attempt to create something new was the infamous two-stroke 5TDF, equipped with two crankshafts and counter-moving pistons. In fact, the only advantage of the product was its high overall power - otherwise it was a crude motor. Which nevertheless was put into production. Not least due to the authority of the development team from Kharkov.

Theoretically, there was nothing criminal in the 5TDF scheme - it just required more time and resources for improvement. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the presence of two more tank engines (V-46 (ancestor of the V-2) and GTD-1000) did not allow the 5TDF to be brought to fruition. Like the T-64 itself, which turned out to be a real tank of extreme parameters, completely unsuitable for wartime.

Suffice it to say that the mastered production of the 5TDF tank engine, the most complex for its time, was mastered in Kharkov at a single plant. In the event of war, a massive missile strike on the workshops of the Kharkov Transport Engineering Plant would be enough to stop the production of the T-64 forever.

But work on the Kharkov engine was not completed and eventually resulted in the six-cylinder product 6TD and the deep modernization of 5TDFM. We must pay tribute: it was possible to bring the engines to an acceptable level of readiness for the series - the Ukrainian Armed Forces are still quite successfully fighting with tanks with such power plants.




The difference between the 2V-12-3A for the Armata (above) and the V-92S2F for the Proryv is significant.

In the Urals, new engines other than the V-2 did not work out from the very beginning. On the one hand, the proven engine has been indispensable for decades.

Firstly, it could be produced at many factories throughout the country - Leningrad, Barnaul, Chelyabinsk, which was strategically very profitable.

Secondly, the engine turned out to be in demand in the national economy - which means that the V-2 can be produced in peacetime. Competencies and valuable production personnel will not be lost. But a replacement engine was needed back in the 70s and 80s. Not to mention the present.

In one of the modern scientific publications, engineers and scientists from Nizhny Tagil (E.V. Isupov, E.G. Gaev, D.V. Yudintsev and M.A. Badrtdinov) rightly note that

“the reserves for further increasing the power of the known design have been exhausted; a significant increase in performance requires a radical change with strengthening of all engine components, which leads to the need for a serious change in production, with corresponding significant financial investments, which casts doubt on the economic feasibility of this process.”

A motor is needed, but where can I get it?

Are they abandoning 2V-12-3A?


The history of the diesel engine for the Armata platform began in the last century. As the book “Tank Engines (from the history of tank building)” says,

“In the late 60s - early 70s, at SKB-75 (now GSKB Transdiesel), under the leadership of chief designer V.I. Butov, work began on a new family of diesel engines of type 2B with a dimension of 15/16 with supercharging from a TKR turbocharger (a turbocharger with a radial-axial turbine), with a layout that facilitates a significant increase in overall engine power.”

The book was published in 1995 and at that time the circuit diagram of type 2B was not disclosed.

In fact, it is a 12-cylinder x-shaped design, providing the necessary compactness with high power. The motor was developed at the Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant and was based on V-2 solutions. If you go deeper, you will find that even the diameters of the cylinder are the same - 150 mm. The new product only has a different piston stroke - reduced from 180 mm to 160 mm.

Motor 2B, like its predecessor B-2, could have several configurations. At the end of the 80s, six- and even sixteen-cylinder versions were tested, but the main one, of course, was a twelve-cylinder engine for the tank. The first vehicle to try on the new product was the T-72. This suggests that the dimensions of the product fit into the engine compartment of a production tank.

A total of three T-72s with 2B engines were tested - the operating time of each reached 200 hours. A dispute broke out between Kharkov and Nizhny Tagil, at the very end of the Soviet Union, whose product is better - 6TD or 2V-12?

The reason for everyone was the collapse of the country and the further degradation of the Kharkov school of tank and engine building. But in Russia they were unable to bring to fruition the concept of an x-shaped engine. First of all, the fate of the engine in civilian life is unclear. The exotic design does not imply ease of use in civilian life. You can’t put a 2V on the St. Petersburg Kirovets - it’s not a dual-purpose motor.

Hence the question - how to maintain the economic feasibility of production on a tank conveyor? Don’t forget, Russia lives in a market economy, and it may happen that even a fully developed 2B-12-3A will simply not be needed by anyone except tank crews. A small series means an exorbitant cost, which entails a lot of problems.






They claim that the Armata engine has been modified

That is why the above authors from Nizhny Tagil (employees of the Ural Design Bureau of Transport Engineering and the Nizhny Tagil Institute of Technology) propose a completely different concept for a tank engine.

In the article “Defining the requirements for the engine of a promising tank” there is a provision that new tank engines

“should initially be developed as dual-purpose engines and be part of a family of unified V12/V8/L6 engines that meet the needs of the Russian Armed Forces and civilian industries.”

That is, we are no longer talking about the x-shaped layout, and the v-shaped layout with a camber angle of 60–90 degrees is considered “the most optimal, both from the point of view of the layout of the engine itself and its placement in the engine-transmission compartment (MTO) of the tank, and and from the point of view of manufacturability and less labor intensity in production compared to other schemes.”

The power of the promising engine is no less than 1 hp. pp., and the service life before the first overhaul is 700 hours or more. It’s hard to disagree with the authors’ arguments, especially in terms of unification with other engines. To put it completely simply, the Tagil residents propose to build the same B-2, only at a modern level, developing the product from scratch. And this is being done clearly in defiance of the Chelyabinsk 000V-2-2A engine for the Armata.

I would like to believe that this is the light at the end of the tunnel, and in Nizhny Tagil there is already developments on a promising engine.

But this is not a quick story. In the conditions of a special operation, the front needs massive and battle-tested vehicles. Now, of course, it’s not 1943, but no one will be involved in putting a new tank engine on the assembly line.

The notorious “tank of maximum parameters” with the corresponding power plant will definitely be built in Russia, but this will happen after a special operation. The intrigue is whether it will be an Armata with 2B-12-3A or something else.
280 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +5
    17 September 2023 04: 28
    Ninay, I’m incredibly wooden in everything I drive... But so, according to echoes from familiar “tractor drivers”. Is it really such a problem to give a tank a normal reverse motion, especially considering that in the Donbass this has been happening for a very long time - is it extremely critical? I just can’t understand what the problem is, that ours are crawling back at the speed of a drunken snail? It's not the engine's fault, so I understand it's the gearbox? But it’s also not a Newtonian binomial, what’s so complicated about that? Why are we crawling and not driving?
    1. +8
      17 September 2023 04: 58
      This is the kinematic diagram of this planetary box.
      It is possible to find a better scheme (they found it during the Soviet era), but this requires fine-tuning the design and a complete restructuring of production. They didn’t dare then, and even less so now.
      In Kharkov they made a final drive with reverse, but this was on a few machines. How reliable it is is unknown.
      1. +15
        17 September 2023 05: 30
        Quote from: ln_ln
        This is the kinematic diagram of this planetary box.

        I know the design of these BCPs and DO NOT SEE any particular complexity. Why were SEVEN forward gears needed? Yes, in order to use the power and torque of relatively low-power diesel engines (up to 1000 hp) 5TDF and V-46 (V-84) as sparingly as possible. On the T-80, with an engine over 1000 hp. The gearbox already has FOUR forward gears.
        Now we have diesel engines installed on our tanks, also with a power of over 1000 hp, which means that at least one gear, or even two forward gears can be abandoned, and at least one additional one can be installed in their place reverse gear.
        Yes, this will require a recalculation of the design of the planetary gears of the BKP, but all this can be solved, as well as the establishment of production of new BKP
        1. +14
          17 September 2023 06: 01
          Six gears are enough. There is a scheme of 6 front + 2 rear. Moreover, on flat rows, which distinguishes it favorably from the serial one.
          But all this will remain only on paper.
          1. +12
            17 September 2023 09: 25
            The Armata has a box with reverse. That is, whether forward or backward, the tank can move at the same speed. And we have a normal box (hydraulic volumetric) for a tank since the times when there was a “Greek tender”, then T-80s with these boxes took part in it, and our troops stationed in the GDR had the same ones (with a steering wheel instead levers).
            1. +1
              17 September 2023 09: 35
              From the article:
              “should initially be developed as dual-purpose engines and be part of a family of unified V12/V8/L6 engines that meet the needs of the Russian Armed Forces and civilian industries.”

              That is, we are no longer talking about the x-shaped layout, and the v-shaped layout with a camber angle of 60–90 degrees is considered “the most optimal, both from the point of view of the layout of the engine itself and its placement in the engine-transmission compartment (MTO) of the tank, and and from the point of view of manufacturability and less labor intensity in production compared to other schemes.”

              ********************************************** ********************************************** *******
              http://engine.aviaport.ru/issues/31/page36.html (информации с других источников не противоречит):
              In order to limit the variety of engines with similar characteristics, in 1970 a decree of the CPSU Central Committee and the USSR Council of Ministers was issued “On carrying out development work to create family of unified multi-fuel piston engines for advanced tanks and infantry fighting vehicles."
              The main executor entrusted with the development of the new family was the head specialized design bureau for diesel engines (GSKBD) of the Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant (ChTZ). ....
              .......In accordance with this resolution, the Chelyabinsk plant began developing a family of four-stroke multi-purpose diesel engines 2B with a dimension of 150/160 mm with a power range of 300...1600 hp. The size range included four samples: six- and eight-cylinder engines with an opposed (horizontal) cylinder arrangement, as well as 12- and 16-cylinder (four-block) engines with an X-shaped cylinder arrangement. The last two models are a combination of two V-twin engines operating on a common shaft. The base engine of the family was a 16-cylinder model.
              Characteristic features of engines of the 2B family are: compactness and small overall dimensions; high level of unification; full dynamic balance; rigid power circuit block crankcase; a moderate level of power and thermal tension at a high specific power; high technology design...
              From this family:
              The 2V-06-2 engine is used as a power plant for an airborne combat vehicle and a self-propelled anti-tank gun.
            2. +4
              17 September 2023 12: 33
              On the Greek T-80, the hydrostatic transmission was built into the engine gearbox, and not parallel to the gearbox, i.e. all gears had the same radii. Cost/effectiveness - not very good. And reliability too.
              1. 0
                18 September 2023 14: 26
                Quote from: ln_ln
                Cost/effectiveness - not very good. And reliability too.

                It’s strange that I haven’t heard any complaints about the GOMP on the GM537, why would tanks with such a unit have problems?
                1. 0
                  21 September 2023 15: 57
                  I haven’t heard about object 537, but if you mean the Mytishchi and Minsk vehicles, then they will be lighter, and they have a two-flow design, and in experimental tanks with side boxes and GOP, problems begin when switching the lagging side box, when the radius provided by the GOP is not enough.
                  1. +1
                    27 September 2023 14: 49
                    Quote from: ln_ln
                    I haven’t heard about object 537, but if you mean the Mytishchi and Minsk vehicles, then they will be lighter, and they have a two-flow design, and in experimental tanks with side boxes and GOP, problems begin when switching the lagging side box, when the radius provided by the GOP is not enough.

                    This is a Mytishchi machine, based on it there is a chassis for beeches, arrows, and tori. Of course they are lighter than a tank, but there is only one gearbox. It’s strange, why make onboard checkpoints in the presence of GMP. On the 537 GOMP, it provides turning not only with a given radius, but also movement of the tracks in different directions (turning around the center of the vehicle and not around the braked track.
            3. +8
              17 September 2023 20: 45
              Hydrostatic is not a box. There was an attempt to add a hydrostatic turning mechanism. This was done for smoother movement when turning.
              The article involves sawdust. It is clear to everyone and the SVO has fully confirmed that all Soviet tanks, the T-64, the T-72, and the T-80, are suitable for war.
              The question is which one is better?
              Then “the word is not a sparrow” flew out in a program on Zvezda about the T-80 and the verbiage was gone. Although how many copies have already been broken... And it has already dawned on the most oak that the gas turbine engine should be in the sky, but there is still a place for diesel on the ground. A diesel engine of comparable power is cheaper, more economical and .... has the advantages of a gas turbine engine. You can push the maximum speed at 80 more, but the T-90M will take off a little faster from a standstill. You can find out why this is so by reading the relevant literature. Who is not too lazy to read, of course. In ancient times, at training ground 4 TD, young officers staged a secret competition between the T-80BV and the diesel T-80UD. 1 km race. "Bereza" initially went ahead, but shortly before the finish line the tank with the gas turbine engine "fired up" and overtook it a little.
              But fuel consumption matters, and this is noted even now, when the T-80 is not used by regiments or even as part of a battalion. And the price of the engine too
              They decided, like the T-90M Breakthrough, to produce new ones, T-72 and T-80 (and T-62 in Atamanovka) to modernize based on existing reserves. For the future generation of MBT, the Armata platform.
              No, they've muddied the waters again. Nothing but bread for the media. We need to talk about something.
              1. +1
                17 September 2023 21: 06
                Quote: Alekseev
                Hydrostatic is not a box. There was an attempt to add a hydrostatic turning mechanism. This was done for smoother movement when turning.

                The design of the MTU-2 itself was original. In 1980, the Interdepartmental Commission (IMC) assessed its layout qualities. The commission's report noted that the MTU-2, for the first time in domestic tank construction, was made in the form of a single power unit. It consists of: engine 2V-16-2 (1200 hp); hydromechanical transmission, with an electrohydraulic engine control system, gear shifting, turning and braking; engine and transmission cooling systems; air purification system and other systems. Its volume was 3,58 cubic meters. m.
                http://www.alexfiles99.narod.ru/engine/2v/2v-16-2.htm
        2. +1
          21 September 2023 21: 12
          On the T-80, with an engine over 1000 hp. The gearbox already has FOUR forward gears.


          The gas turbine engine adapts to driving conditions over a wider range than a diesel engine, so the number of gears has been reduced. Nobody shortened them for 6TD.
      2. TIR
        +1
        21 September 2023 21: 22
        The reversible system is always weak and unreliable. Since the reverse transmission unit (to put it more simply, the reverse gear) is always under load. Both when moving forward and when moving backward. Therefore, the wear there is prohibitive. The real solution is to have 2 reverse speeds. Leave one as it is now, the second rear one will be increased significantly for combat operations. And add rear view cameras for the driver
    2. +6
      17 September 2023 07: 54
      In Soviet times, we were given the following figures for the cost of tank engines: a diesel engine for a T72 in 1985 cost 3200 rubles, and a gas turbine engine for a T80 cost 170 thousand rubles. Are they too rich to restart production of a terribly expensive gas turbine? Its advantage is its quick start-up at severe subzero temperatures. Like on the Shilka, the turbine warms up the engine at startup, only when the turbine damper comes off during startup and a torch of about three meters flies out. Why do we need, by and large, a tank from yesterday with a terribly expensive and difficult to repair engine, who decided to break through the T80 armies?
      1. +10
        17 September 2023 09: 36
        Quote: Thrifty
        How on Shilka the turbine warms up the engine when starting

        It doesn't heat anything up. The turbine on Shilka provides power, independent of engine operation. If without a turbine, then the engine must produce at least 2000 rpm, even at idle. The engine there is heated by an open flame from the injectors, where diesel is supplied. Almost exactly the same as on the T64.
      2. +9
        17 September 2023 09: 43
        Quote: Thrifty
        In Soviet times, we were given the following figures for the cost of tank engines: a diesel engine for a T72 in 1985 cost 3200 rubles, and a gas turbine engine for a T80 cost 170 thousand rubles.

        Late 80s
        the cost of T-80U tanks is 824 thousand rubles,
        ------------------------ T-72B - 280 thousand rubles.
        Engines
        T-80U - 104 thousand rubles,
        T-72B - 14 thousand rubles.

        -------- when selling abroad
        T-80 --- 4 million dollars,
        T-90 --- $2.7 million
        1. +6
          17 September 2023 12: 55
          Quote: Bad_gr
          Quote: Thrifty
          In Soviet times, we were given the following figures for the cost of tank engines: a diesel engine for a T72 in 1985 cost 3200 rubles, and a gas turbine engine for a T80 cost 170 thousand rubles.

          Late 80s
          the cost of T-80U tanks is 824 thousand rubles,
          ------------------------ T-72B - 280 thousand rubles.
          Engines
          T-80U - 104 thousand rubles,
          T-72B - 14 thousand rubles.

          -------- when selling abroad
          T-80 --- 4 million dollars,
          T-90 --- $2.7 million

          I don’t think it’s possible now, in the XNUMXst century, to operate with price data from Soviet times...
          If you lean your horn into additive, CALS, etc. technology, I think it is possible to obtain a cheap gas turbine engine with the given parameters. An additional bonus will be a huge technological breakthrough in all sectors of the manufacturing industry. But, “who needs this?”© sad
          IMHO hi
          1. +3
            17 September 2023 21: 10
            I think it is possible to obtain a cheap gas turbine engine with the given parameters.

            Don’t forget, we must consider not just the engine, but the installation, and if a diesel engine can operate in some installations even without a gearbox, then for a gas turbine engine a gearbox is required, the output speed is too high, and the higher the speed (efficiency) of the gas turbine engine, the more difficult (more expensive) ) gearbox.
            1. +1
              17 September 2023 21: 21
              Quote: Popandos
              for a gas turbine engine, a gearbox is required, the output speed is too high, and the higher the speed (efficiency) of the gas turbine engine, the more complex (more expensive) the gearbox is.
              What’s bad about the one that is now on the T-80U?
            2. +3
              17 September 2023 21: 21
              The gas turbine engine has one more feature: it cannot operate as an engine brake. Therefore, the service brakes must be more effective than those of a diesel engine.
              1. +2
                17 September 2023 21: 40
                Quote: _KM_
                The gas turbine engine has one more feature: it cannot operate as an engine brake....
                Where did you read about this?
                1. +1
                  19 September 2023 00: 23
                  In order for the gas turbine engine to be able to brake, it needs to be thoroughly modified. What was already revealed by the first tests of a helicopter gas turbine engine installed on a tank on a trial basis.
                  1. +3
                    19 September 2023 01: 08
                    Quote: _KM_
                    In order for the gas turbine engine to be able to brake, it needs to be thoroughly modified. What was already revealed by the first tests of a helicopter gas turbine engine installed on a tank on a trial basis.
                    There are 2 extracts from articles on this topic in this thread, read them. Engine braking on the T-80 was introduced on the first T-80. I have no information about how effective this system is on modern T80s.
                    1. +1
                      19 September 2023 01: 37
                      That’s what I’m writing about, that engine braking requires a thorough modification of the gas turbine engine, and the first helicopter turbines at that time did not have it. It appeared after serious work. And this (GTE T-80) is not a simple modification or conversion of an aircraft turbine.
              2. +1
                20 September 2023 19: 33
                Do you often observe how mechanics on diesel engines brake with their engines?
          2. +4
            18 September 2023 07: 29
            If you can find data on design solutions, primarily on the materials used and processing methods - GTD1000/1250 (you can find limited volumes using them)/1500 (extremely few) - then you will understand that these are different generations of motors and differ not only in power . But 1500 was frozen in the early 90s, although at that moment it was already stepping on the heels of B2 in all respects, and was several times ahead in terms of service life. At a normal rate of development, while the last juice was being squeezed out of the B2 family, where was this engine? Here everyone operates with the cost of production.... forgetting about the cost of the product's life cycle. And the conditional 10 or 40 rubles per power plant were important given the scale of production of thousands of products per year - now our glorious defense industry is unlikely to produce even a thousand products per year in the near future. I am writing as a person who has been on the topic for quite a long time, in particular on 219th edition. A cool example of those same technologies - I’ve been using a walk-behind tractor with a KADVI engine for 15 years...during the period of operation the compression has practically not dropped...in this motor the rings are made using the technology of ring seals for the GTD1250 with a normal selection of friction pairs...NEVA motor from Red October it works in the same modes for 5-6 years..
          3. -1
            20 September 2023 19: 29
            It’s easier to kick a dead horse (diesels) than to try to develop and move to a different level of development. Collective farm doctrine and nothing new.
        2. +3
          18 September 2023 10: 22
          Quote: Bad_gr
          Late 80s
          the cost of T-80U tanks is 824 thousand rubles,
          ------------------------ T-72B - 280 thousand rubles.
          Engines
          T-80U - 104 thousand rubles,
          T-72B - 14 thousand rubles.

          -------- when selling abroad
          T-80 --- 4 million dollars,
          T-90 --- $2.7 million

          It is not yet known what form the T-80 will resume in production. It is likely that the engine will still be diesel, and the turret will be from a T-90 (along with an automatic loader). Then the price tag will be acceptable, and the more advanced chassis of the T-80, and the equipment, and the entire technical process of Omsktransmash, tailored for the production of the T-80, will not require restructuring... and the Army will receive an additional number of tanks in a single time period. Perhaps the idea of ​​​​resuming the T-80 in production is also caused by the need to produce a whole range of components necessary for major repairs and modernization of old T-80s from storage bases.
          And yet, two tank factories during the war are much better than one.
      3. +3
        17 September 2023 13: 08
        With mass production, it will become cheaper, but the most important thing is that if a diesel engine has already exhausted the possibilities for modernization, then a gas turbine engine has not; taking into account the development of technology, it can be accelerated to one and a half thousand horses if desired. And if it works out, then as an engine option for the armata platform...
        And the T-80 is not a tank of yesterday, it is a completely modern platform, similar in creation time to all the world's main battle tanks, be it our T-90, or Leo2, or Abrams, or Leclerc...
        Naturally, when they start putting it into production, it will not be a tank from the 80s, it will be modernized and further unified with the T-90, I don’t even rule out replacing the turret and automatic loader from the T-90m, in this form it will be extremely modern and a perfect tank, no worse than the T-90m or any Western tank,
        But even if they leave the automatic loader as it was, the turret will still be rearranged and it will not be cast, but hot-rolled.
        1. -3
          17 September 2023 21: 35
          Quote: Georgy Sviridov
          And the T-80 is not a tank of yesterday, it is a completely modern platform, similar in creation time to all the world's main battle tanks, be it our T-90, or Leo2, or Abrams, or Leclerc...

          No, of course not, where did you get the idea? The biggest problem is the inability to strengthen the bottom armor to the level of the same Leo2 and Abrams. The bathtub, which is the same for all 4 tanks T-64, T-72, T-80, T-90, also cannot be significantly strengthened. What does all these procedures have to do with, if they could cram in tons of passive armor, they would make the T-90 heavier than 55 tons, which neither the engine nor the suspension would support. Why do you think they started making Armata? But since the beginning of the 2000s, there was an excellent alternative to modernize the entire tank fleet, greatly increase the survivability of the crew by removing the AZ in the turret niche, no BC in the BO, this is the Burlak tower. By the way, the turret’s armor was also higher than the T-90, since the AZ made it possible to increase the mass and size in front of the turret. But it was the Omsk design bureau and then Tagil put pressure on everyone and the project turned out to be forgotten and Tagil even planed a tank with its own AZ, which of course has its advantages, but all of them are crossed out by the danger for the crew in case of penetration of the BO. As for Leo2 and Abrams, they were originally made with the possibility of modernization, the layout and suspension have enough service life, which they implemented. It is also necessary to take into account that the armored steels of the 70s-80s are much inferior to modern ones, from which, for example, new infantry fighting vehicles and MBTs are made, so it is impossible to achieve the desired results from tanks built back in the USSR during modernization. Of course, all MBTs should go through the best possible modernization, add armor and strengthen the fire control system, but as for me, in this war the T-shki won theirs, there are a lot of weak points, despite all their effectiveness with fire, the crew losses are large. We need a new platform, with very powerful armor against mines, cumulative shells and missiles, so that the crew can survive after hitting mines and IEDs, and the tank can then be pulled out and restored.
          1. +5
            17 September 2023 22: 21
            Quote: karabas-barabas
            No, of course not, where did you get the idea? The biggest problem is the inability to strengthen the bottom armor to the level of the same Leo2 and Abrams.

            Abrams has a bottom 2 cm thick. In what place is it superior to ours?
            1. +2
              18 September 2023 14: 50
              that's what's interesting,
              in the 90s, at the Kirov plant in Leningrad, on the T-80BV (not U, there is an influx of additional armor from the mechanic) they experimentally installed a 152-mm smoothbore gun and also developed a new welded turret to replace the cast one, with the possibility of installing a built-in remote sensing device on roof of the tower, the photo shows a 3-layer composite between the hatches, and the height is about 20 cm
              Now if only this topic could be implemented on the T-72B3M, T-90M, T-80BVM
              built-in remote sensing on the roof of the tower will be much better than barbecues and grates
          2. +2
            18 September 2023 16: 23
            It’s especially funny to hear about pulling barefoot 70-ton tanks out of the mud.
            Write in search.
        2. -1
          18 September 2023 09: 30
          T 90 AZ automatic loader, T 80 MZ loading mechanism. 80 never had AZ
          1. 0
            8 February 2024 14: 11
            . T 80 MZ loading mechanism. 80 never had AZ

            “MZ” or “loading mechanism” (as in the original, see technical description) is a Kharkov terminological error, since it is not a mechanism, but an automatic complex consisting of several mechanisms (MPK, MP, MD, MU), a hydraulic system and set of electrical automation.
        3. +1
          25 October 2023 22: 15
          They have already tried to implement your wishes in a prototype, which was called “Black Eagle”.
          After it there was the Burlak R&D project, which envisaged the creation of a unified combat compartment for the T-72/T-80/T-90 series.
          But the first one was created in the 90s, and there was little time for new tanks, and the Armata was preferred to the second one.
      4. +3
        18 September 2023 04: 20
        One of the versions about the T-80 is the Finnish-Scandinavian border, everyone’s eyes are blurred by the Northern Military District and it is necessary to take measures to confrontation in the north today... especially since the confrontation with Brussels is moving from purely economic to military-political.
        1. -1
          20 September 2023 19: 37
          You probably forgot that our problems are solved not even as they arise, but as we get used to them.
      5. +1
        20 September 2023 19: 26
        a diesel engine for a T72 in 1985 cost 3200 rubles, and a gas turbine engine for a T80 cost 170 thousand rubles

        Doesn’t it seem suspicious that a tank diesel cost the same as a Zhiguli car and not much more expensive than a Kamaz, which also has a diesel?
        On the other hand, has there really been no progress in the production of gas turbine engines over the past more than 35 years? Or, as usual, has it passed us by orphaned and we can only observe gas turbine engines in foreign amateur models?
        By the way, what exactly is the difficulty of repairing tank gas turbine engines?
    3. +3
      17 September 2023 11: 03
      I just can’t understand what the problem is, that ours are crawling back at the speed of a drunken snail? It's not the engine's fault, so I understand it's the gearbox?

      Gearbox, yes. Or rather, gear ratios. Reverse. I note that the reverse speed has never been considered critically important by anyone. The driver has no visibility back, so the slower you go, the less chance you have of running over someone or driving into something.
      Look, Ninay, in everything I ride, I’m wooden to the point of disgrace...

      But it’s also not a Newton binomial, what’s so complicated about that?

      Decide already, either you don’t understand anything, or you’ve studied Newton’s binomial... laughing
      1. +6
        17 September 2023 14: 25
        Quote: Grandfather is an amateur
        I just can’t understand what the problem is, that ours are crawling back at the speed of a drunken snail? It's not the engine's fault, so I understand it's the gearbox?

        Gearbox, yes. Or rather, gear ratios. Reverse. I note that the reverse speed has never been considered critically important by anyone. The driver has no visibility back, so the slower you go, the less chance you have of running over someone or driving into something.

        Firstly, the driver can be advised, for example, by the commander. Secondly, what’s stopping you from installing a couple of cameras? Chinese cars are equipped with a similar option, and God himself ordered it to be installed on a tank worth 4 million dollars.
        1. +3
          18 September 2023 07: 35
          But, damn it, you won’t believe it, but already in the early 90s, the experimental 219m had a rearview camera)))
          1. +3
            18 September 2023 12: 01
            Quote from Kepka
            Secondly, what’s stopping you from installing a couple of cameras?
            On the T90M there are 4 cameras on the turret + a driver’s video camera on the rear armor plate
        2. +3
          20 September 2023 19: 48
          Nothing on the technical and technological side prevents you from filling a tank with cameras from the turret to the tracks. From the point of view of relativistic quantum mechanics and string theory, there are also no restrictions. Cameras are now cheap and for every taste, although the production cycle is much more knowledge-intensive than in the production of gas turbine engines. But who needs this? Fighters? Well, they are welding barbecues onto the tower. Soon they will install a cheap video surveillance system on the tank to provide full all-round visibility day and night (now there are good night vision cameras).
          To the land staff general? So his foreign car already has front and rear view cameras. What else are cameras for?
      2. +2
        17 September 2023 14: 32
        Quote: Grandfather is an amateur
        I note that the reverse speed has never been considered critically important by anyone.

        Yeah, I just watched it near Shirokino. I went out, but with a slipper on the floor and a U-turn - there was nowhere to go, I had to turn it in backwards, but while they were handing it over, I saw what was coming to them... Should I say what the tankers said to this? “What did dad say? - Cross out the mate? Well, then dad didn’t say anything.”
        Well, I heard a bit of Newton’s binomial somewhere))) But with the one who travels, I’m wooden, so I rely on the words of my friends, here to argue - I’m incompetent, like an akyn - what I see, I sing.
  2. -2
    17 September 2023 05: 02
    Of the “new” developments (70s), the only normal tank diesel is the Kharkov 470.

    I did not find information on the implementation of charge air cooling on it.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. +1
      17 September 2023 05: 22
      Quote from: ln_ln
      Of the “new” developments (70s), the only normal tank diesel is the Kharkov 470.

      I hasten to disappoint you. It is worse than the engine of the 2-V-2 family that is installed on the T-14. Since he did not go through the full stage of testing and was not spared from numerous childhood diseases
      1. +2
        17 September 2023 05: 42
        Do not hurry. 2B is not an engine.
        That is, the cylinder can be considered used up, but then it’s a complete hemorrhoid.
        1. +1
          17 September 2023 18: 28
          Quote from: ln_ln
          That is, the cylinder can be considered used up, but then it’s a complete hemorrhoid.

          Well, of course, the engine of this family is already installed on the Armata and is working.
          By the way, its appearance completely rejects the thesis promoted in this article:
          The trouble with the situation is that deep modernization of the honored and legendary B-2 is impossible

          This engine is just such an upgrade. It is easy to see that these are two engines of the V-2 family, located horizontally and operating on a single crankshaft
          1. 0
            17 September 2023 21: 54
            Quote: svp67
            Well, of course, the engine of this family is already installed on the Armata and is working.

            This is how it works, it may work, but with what resource. The main difficulty of this arrangement of cylinders is the provision of oil to everything that moves there evenly and it seems that due to the fact that the floor of the engine is “upside down” this caused problems. This motor was pulled out recently, since initially the German MTU was planned for Armata and would have received sanctions on the military-industrial complex before Crimea. Well, recently, 10 years, but to what extent this engine began to meet all the requirements is a question.
          2. +1
            18 September 2023 20: 09
            Quote: svp67
            Quote from: ln_ln
            That is, the cylinder can be considered used up, but then it’s a complete hemorrhoid.

            Well, of course, the engine of this family is already installed on the Armata and is working.
            By the way, its appearance completely rejects the thesis promoted in this article:
            The trouble with the situation is that deep modernization of the honored and legendary B-2 is impossible

            This engine is just such an upgrade. It is easy to see that these are two engines of the V-2 family, located horizontally and operating on a single crankshaft

            Please explain 2 points then:
            1 point, if the new engine of the Armata tank is made of two V-2 engines, then why does the new Armata engine not have 24 cylinders, but the same 12 cylinders as the V-2 engine,
            2nd point, if the V-2 engine has an engine capacity of 39 liters, then why does the new engine for the Armata tank, which according to you consists of two V-2s, have a volume of not 78 liters but 36 liters, which is even less than the volume of the V-2 engine.
        2. 0
          18 September 2023 07: 41
          This layout scheme, by definition, cannot be non-hemorrhoidal... The late Porsche will not let you lie with its program for the dieselization of Wehrmacht tanks)))
  3. +19
    17 September 2023 05: 10
    Barnaul Transmash is my first production experience. Workshop 190, export site in my father’s team.
    I remember a poster with a product range - over 70 variants of 6 and 12 cylinder engines. Marine, automobile, diesel, drilling, diesel generator sets, low magnetic.
    Evacuated from Kharkov, the plant began producing engines at the beginning of 1942. During the Second World War, 10% of engines were made from Barnaul!
  4. +7
    17 September 2023 05: 18
    This means that GTD-1250 will soon be in great demand.
    This means that GTD-1400 will soon be in demand, for which there are developments and they urgently need to be restored
    1. +9
      17 September 2023 09: 26
      The engine for the T-14 Armata has finally been brought to life.
      For several years, specialists from the Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant have been eliminating the main shortcomings of the X-shaped diesel engine 2B12-3.
      The engineers managed to eliminate the excessive gluttony of the engine and also reduce oil consumption. The main problem with heat removal and the constant threat of overheating at rated power has also been solved.
      Diesel A-85-3A, also known as 2B12-3A, is four-stroke, X-shaped, multi-fuel, can run on gasoline, kerosene or their mixtures in any proportion. Has a switchable maximum power of 1200 hp. With. up to 1500 l. With. A short-term increase in power up to 1800 hp is possible. At a power of 1200 hp. With. Guaranteed service life of 10000 hours.
      https://www.zr.ru/content/news/946806-raskryty-osobennosti-dvigatelya/
      1. +1
        17 September 2023 12: 39
        It's all from the newspapers...
        But in real life, a 2B12 has a minimum speed of 1200, below that there is resonance, and this cannot be cured.
        Well, that is, it is treated, for this it is necessary to build a normal V-shape on the basis of this used cylinder, as the Tagil residents wrote.
        1. 0
          20 September 2023 19: 53
          But in real life, a 2B12 has a minimum speed of 1200, below that there is resonance, and this cannot be cured.

          Install a special rev limiter so that it does not fall below 1220 and you can launch it into series. Resolving the issue managerially.
          1. 0
            21 September 2023 16: 11
            This is precisely the “managerial” decision that was made. How do you get into boxing?
            1. 0
              29 September 2023 14: 45
              1 Let's solve problems as they arise, subsequently discuss and prepare a special commission to make a decision on them (official style)
              2 There are no problems. Add a special downshift and the problem is solved (style manager)
    2. 0
      18 September 2023 07: 45
      GTD1400 - it definitely won’t be (unless, of course, an idiot manager from GBTU decides to improve it) GTD1400 is a GTD1250F (with afterburner mode) and in principle is not intended to produce maximum performance for a long time
      1. +1
        18 September 2023 12: 19
        Quote from Kepka
        GTD1400 - definitely won’t be.......
  5. +4
    17 September 2023 05: 24
    Is the 5TDF engine the same one that needs to be warmed up before starting, even in summer?
    1. +6
      17 September 2023 07: 06
      Yes it is!
      Theoretically, there was nothing criminal in the 5TDF scheme - it just required more time and resources for improvement. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the presence of two more tank engines (V-46 (ancestor of the V-2) and GTD-1000) did not allow the 5TDF to be brought to fruition.

      Three decades were not enough for improvement!!!?
      1. -1
        17 September 2023 07: 51
        Yes it is!
        Theoretically, there was nothing criminal in the 5TDF scheme - it just required more time and resources for improvement. The collapse of the Soviet Union and the presence of two more tank engines (V-46 (ancestor of the V-2) and GTD-1000) did not allow the 5TDF to be brought to fruition.
        Three decades were not enough for improvement!!!?

        All complaints about liberals
      2. +1
        17 September 2023 12: 45
        Unlike the 6, the XNUMXTD is a normal engine. At least the cylinder purging has been completed.
        Tuning a 2-stroke engine is very difficult. The British abandoned them, leaving only the Japanese.
      3. 0
        18 September 2023 07: 47
        Anyone who has at least once disassembled this engine and used it for at least half a year will say with confidence - very little!!!
      4. +1
        20 September 2023 20: 03
        Three decades were not enough for improvement!!!?

        Four decades, to be exact. And this is not only with gas turbine engines. Take microelectronics or machine tool manufacturing as an example.
    2. +13
      17 September 2023 09: 39
      Good morning . The problem of engines in the Union and Russia has always been. It's rare that an engine can be considered successful. And we're not just talking about tanks and diesel engines. I have a relative, a railway driver, how much he swore at Soviet engines on diesel locomotives. Hundreds of liters of oil are consumed per shift. They also received diesel locomotives from the GDR, they said they were much better. And it’s no secret that West German diesel engines are much better, whether for the civilian sector or for shipbuilding. So why don't specialists study these engines thoroughly? Maybe not right away, but I think there will be results. If someone now points out to me that it is necessary to comply with patents, that this is practically theft of intellectual property, I will only laugh. We must act like Vaska the cat. And it is necessary to follow the technology in production down to the smallest detail. Principle: Oh, it will do, I’m not doing it for myself, for someone else’s uncle. This is the wrong way. We need to teach people the production culture of everything they do.
      1. +5
        17 September 2023 12: 14
        Kuznets55 at one time worked at an electric locomotive repair plant, they praised Czech-made engines and compressors. I just worked there as a compressor operator and went through them. They are really easier to repair than ours, the oil is different, and there were almost no shavings when completely disassembled, unlike our compressors.
      2. +11
        17 September 2023 12: 30
        There are many Soviet videos on the topic. Even at the dawn of engine building, we copied US engines, the same GAZ. Here is the engine in front of you. Scale the details from inches to millimeters and that’s it. But problems begin - cast iron alloys, casting methodology. Then resource tests. It is commonplace to find out why the liners wear unevenly and can take months or years.
        The problem may not be reproducible in the laboratory. While the casting is being rebuilt, the test engines are completing their mileage. While chemical laboratories study the used oil, this and that. The year counter spins like a spinning top. And there are also helicopter pilots, sailors, and ordinary trucks in line. That's why unification is needed.
        1. +2
          17 September 2023 21: 26
          That's why unification is needed.

          It's a pity to add mono only once.
          Expert in the topic, you can see right away good
        2. 0
          13 December 2023 18: 00
          It’s the same with microelectronics. And with software. An engineering product matures over years, not weeks. The one who started a century ago (and didn’t give up) is the leader!
      3. +1
        17 September 2023 13: 08
        Yes, oil consumption is our problem, even on tanks, even on KamAZ trucks. The 5TDF has a nominal oil consumption that is 5 times higher than that of the similar Leyland L60, which also took 20 years to refine.
      4. +2
        17 September 2023 14: 29
        Quote: smith 55
        Good morning . The problem of engines in the Union and Russia has always been. It's rare that an engine can be considered successful. And we're not just talking about tanks and diesel engines. I have a relative, a railway driver, how much he swore at Soviet engines on diesel locomotives. Hundreds of liters of oil are consumed per shift. They also received diesel locomotives from the GDR, they said they were much better. And it’s no secret that West German diesel engines are much better, whether for the civilian sector or for shipbuilding. So why don't specialists study these engines thoroughly? Maybe not right away, but I think there will be results. If someone now points out to me that it is necessary to comply with patents, that this is practically theft of intellectual property, I will only laugh. We must act like Vaska the cat. And it is necessary to follow the technology in production down to the smallest detail. Principle: Oh, it will do, I’m not doing it for myself, for someone else’s uncle. This is the wrong way. We need to teach people the production culture of everything they do.

        By the way, diesel locomotive workers say that the GDR supplied diesel of such quality that they clearly took revenge for Stalingrad
      5. 0
        17 September 2023 16: 22
        Accuracy and cleanliness of processing, tolerances are the difference between our engines and Western and Japanese ones.
        I somehow capitalized on Japanese approvals for my engine at NIVA, heaven and earth from the factory version, a mileage guarantee of 500000 thousand and above, but I found only two turners per city of a million capable of withstanding the size and cleanliness of processing. You really only need high-quality oil.
        Yes
        1. +2
          17 September 2023 21: 30
          I found only two turners in a city with a population of millions capable of withstanding the size and cleanliness of processing

          Turners? What did they sharpen for your engine?
        2. -1
          17 September 2023 22: 40
          The story about the Niva engine capital is not surprising, but how did you find only 2 turners with the required qualifications in a city with a population of over a million? Or are there so many specialists like this and everyone knows them?
        3. +1
          18 September 2023 07: 57
          I had an 1800 engine in the field, which at one time was riveted by the pilot production of AvtoVAZ ... even in the base - heaven and earth compared to the serial one (which I replaced with it) ... and after putting my hands on it on a modest budget, without even being involved in the formation 130 forces were removed from it...with a mileage of approx. 100 thousand there was no drop in performance, while the car was used as a training
      6. +3
        17 September 2023 16: 40
        I once saw a video on YouTube about the shortcomings of Leo2. There they also talked about their engine, comparing it with ours, so the power of 1500 l/s is of course more than that of the T90 at 1130 l/s, but this is achieved by weight and volume more than 2 times, our engine weighs 2 tons and 3 cubic meters takes up, and the German 7 cubes and more than 5 tons of weight belay
        1. +5
          17 September 2023 17: 21
          Quote: Eroma
          but this is achieved by more than 2 times the mass and volume, our engine weighs 2 tons and takes up 3 cubic meters, while the German engine weighs 7 cubes and weighs more than 5 tons
          1. 0
            17 September 2023 17: 33
            The Abrams has a different gas turbine engine design, with higher efficiency.
            1. +6
              17 September 2023 17: 53
              Quote: _KM_
              The Abrams has a different gas turbine engine design, with higher efficiency.
              And where can you read about this? And the lion's share of the engine's volume is occupied by air filters, which constantly need to be cleaned. On the T-80U, the air duct is located in the dust-free place of the tank (to install this, the tank was blown in a wind tunnel); the air supply is equipped with cyclones, which clean themselves + vibration cleaning of the blades, which is not a thing on the Abrams.

              T-80 Air filter, and the oil cooler is located directly in the engine air duct, so it does not take up additional space.
          2. 0
            18 September 2023 07: 59
            Aha ... but it was still that kind of work ... how many options did we drive on 219 thinking, most readers don’t have enough imagination)))
      7. -1
        17 September 2023 21: 23
        So why don't specialists study these engines thoroughly?

        In our country, unfortunately, we cannot cast steel with stable characteristics in mass production, and not only that (all mass production is far from perfect). Therefore, the engine made for testing and state acceptance is very far from the production engine.
      8. +3
        18 September 2023 12: 23
        As a railway worker, I’ll ask, what kind of GDR diesel locomotives did your relative “receive”?
        This is how stories are born. He most likely worked on some M62 with an ancient D40 two-stroke diesel engine. And then the same, but modernized M62 with a D49 diesel engine appears, an excellent four-stroke engine. They were also supplied to the GDR.
      9. 0
        20 September 2023 22: 06
        Quote: Blacksmith 55
        It's rare that an engine can be considered successful


        What's wrong with the B-2?

        Quote: Blacksmith 55
        They also received diesel locomotives from the GDR, he says they were much better


        If your relative is talking about D49.
        Then in the early 2000s the Germans came to Kolomna. Repair those same “bad” Soviet diesel engines. They received a fleet of diesel locomotives from the USSR along with the engines and, strangely enough (!), they were in no hurry to get rid of them. Their order then literally saved the plant, from which everyone turned their backs. Including the admirals who are howling today “give us diesel!” It was from them, the Germans, and under their order, that the development of a new diesel locomotive began. So it looks like your relative is whistling. There was a very short period immediately after the launch of the series when the engine suffered from childhood illnesses. But it was completed in working order.

        Quote: Blacksmith 55
        So why don’t specialists study these engines thoroughly?

        Because it is not enough to measure with a barbell how what was done and where. The problem begins when you have to reproduce what you measured. You will have to recreate, or rather recreate, the entire technological process. And it may absolutely not fit into your existing machines and equipment.
        And now everything is aggravated many times over by decades of disregard for engine production in the country in general. Well, neither the army, nor the navy, nor industry needed engines. What was Chubais' will? We'll sell the oil and buy everything else! And at the same time, the equipment and technology for producing motors disappeared. Nowadays, even forging a crankshaft for a powerful engine is a problem.
      10. +1
        26 September 2023 10: 10
        Quote: Blacksmith 55
        . The problem of engines in the Union and Russia has always been

        No, not always, problems were solved before Khrushchev, who cut all funds for modernization. As a result, AVTOVAZ and Moskvich produced the engine for 60 years without changes, because all R&D was not funded. Until 1955, engine development was tough; just read the story of the M-82. As a result, this engine was produced for almost 70 years.
  6. Eug
    +5
    17 September 2023 05: 39
    We need a line of diesel engines - tank, tractor (and other wheeled and tracked), ship, locomotive, for drilling, etc. But in order to do it “smartly”, with reasonable and most effective unification, we need different economic conditions in the country. And it would be very interesting to compare the V-2 with the 2V-12-3A in terms of power per liter of volume.
    1. +4
      17 September 2023 06: 10
      Liter power is not the most informative value for comparing engines. More interesting are the average effective pressure and the average piston speed.
    2. 0
      18 September 2023 08: 05
      You won’t find any revelations in this comparison))) There are concepts of optimal filling of chambers and combustion conditions of the mixture... this is definitely not the strong point of this scheme))) the only plus is greater balance (well, except for the volume occupied by the engine - a cube, that’s what cube) but there are no questions about counting - all data on motors is publicly available
      1. +1
        21 September 2023 16: 18
        The V12 has the best balance. Brevity is the soul of wit.
  7. +12
    17 September 2023 05: 50
    Quote: svp67

    I know the design of these BCPs and DO NOT SEE any particular complexity. Why were SEVEN forward gears needed? Yes, in order to use power and torque as sparingly as possible

    When turning, different gears in the gearbox gave fixed turning radii without using the brakes. Our tanks (with BKP) make turns in a series of sectors-chords. Leo2 has
    differential double-flow rotation mechanism with hydrostatic transmission. This allows you to set the turning radius steplessly. Mechanical driver approved)
    1. +1
      17 September 2023 06: 08
      Not only Leo-2. BMP-3, for example.
      By the way, Leo-2 could have been without GOP. LSG-3000 (aka 4HP-3000, which later became available on S-1 and K1) was made for him.
  8. -5
    17 September 2023 06: 45
    The V-2 engine and its descendants were not actually used in civilian use. Only military production.
    1. +11
      17 September 2023 07: 40
      The river fleet uses 3D6 and 3D12 diesel engines. These are direct descendants of B2.
    2. +5
      17 September 2023 08: 34
      Quote from Escariot
      The V-2 engine and its descendants were not actually used in civilian use. Only military production.

      He was also useful in the civil service. In the Barnaultransmash association (formerly plant No. 77), the in-line D2 was created from the V-6, and later the full-size D12. They were installed on many river boats and tugs, on motor ships of the Moskva and Moskvich series. The TGK2 shunting diesel locomotive, produced with a total circulation of ten thousand copies, received the 1D6 modification, and the 1D12 was installed on MAZ mining dump trucks. Heavy tractors, locomotives, tractors, various special machines - wherever a powerful, reliable diesel engine was required, you will find the closest relatives of the great B-2 engine.
    3. +3
      17 September 2023 09: 55
      Quote from Escariot
      The V-2 engine and its descendants were not actually used in civilian use. Only military production.
      Diesel power plants of 200 kilowatts were produced with these, but derated engines.
      1. +1
        18 September 2023 04: 35
        Tractor DET-250 engine from the V-2 series..
        Quote: Bad_gr
        The V-2 engine and its descendants were not actually used in civilian life. Only military production.
    4. +1
      17 September 2023 11: 46
      How mistaken you are. Where, may I ask, did you get such information? It’s not even funny to me, but on the contrary, it’s sad! I hope your colleagues have dispelled your misconceptions. All you have to do is make a request on the Internet on the issue of interest!
    5. +2
      17 September 2023 12: 35
      Diesel locomotives TU2, TU4, TU7 were all equipped with variations of the V-2
    6. Alf
      +1
      17 September 2023 19: 30
      Quote from Escariot
      The V-2 engine and its descendants were not actually used in civilian use. Only military production.

      Based on the V-2 engine, in the second half of the 1940s and early 1950s, lightweight high-speed diesel engines were created and mastered at Barnaultransmash for various sectors of the national economy - first six-cylinder D6, and then 12-cylinder D12. D12A-525 was used on multi-axle special wheeled chassis (SWC) for missile systems, air defense radars, etc., tank carriers and airfield tractors. The deformed D6 is widely used on river vessels.

      The 3D6 engine was installed on:

      Project 1606 tug boats "Kostromich" (both 3D6 and 3D6N)
      river trams "Moskvich"
      river trams "Moscow"
      tugs BM, BV
      service and traveling boats of projects 371 “Admiralteets” and 376 “Yaroslavets”
      The 3D12 engine was installed on:

      tugs LS-56A,
      RT of project 911A and, later, for individual river basins on vessels of project 911B [source not specified 3914 days]
      hovercraft "Luch" (boosted to 520 hp)
      Modification 1D6 was used on the diesel locomotive TGK2, the DGKU (broad gauge) railcar, and 1D12 was used on heavy-duty vehicles MAZ-525 and MAZ-530, diesel locomotives TU2, TU7 of narrow (750 mm) gauge railways, diesel locomotives TGM1, TGM23, TGM40 normal ( 1520 mm) track. It was also used in the Armed Forces of the USSR and the Russian Federation as a drive for the AD-100 (100 kW) alternating current generator.

      The DET-250 tractor was initially equipped with an engine of this family, V-748[21], later V-30, V-31.
    7. 0
      18 September 2023 08: 08
      Well, why, and Kurgan and Minsk tractors ... for example
  9. +1
    17 September 2023 06: 46
    “I would like to believe that this is the light at the end of the tunnel, and in Nizhny Tagil there is already developments on a promising engine.”

    By “developments” we apparently mean technical ones. requirements, because there was and is no engine design bureau and production in N. Tagil.

    “That is, we are no longer talking about an x-shaped scheme” - Less than half a century has passed.
  10. -2
    17 September 2023 07: 14
    Does anyone know where a tank engine is used in the civilian sector? Apart from MZKT tractors, it seems like nowhere. And even then not on all models, and even then this is all dual-use equipment. They were also used for launching installations, but I don’t know how now. That’s why I think so, a tank engine is a priori expensive and is used due to its specifics, mainly on a tank. There’s no escape from this, and if you also bother with conversion, then nothing good will definitely happen. Everyone probably remembers this bad demand from a not good person.
    1. +7
      17 September 2023 07: 44
      The 3D6 diesel half of the B2 is widely used in the river fleet. D12 is used in railway transport, river transport, and is used as the main one in auger snow removal machines.
    2. +6
      17 September 2023 08: 40
      Does anyone know where a tank engine is used in the civilian sector?

      Used in many places.
      The meaning of the article in a nutshell is a super engine but only for a tank, or a good engine for everyone.
      The advantage of the X-lineup is its dimensions, good for a tank, bad for the national economy, a small series is an expensive engine.
      In-line or V-shaped layout, good for the national economy, not best for a tank, large series - cheap engine.
      As they say, the choice is yours.
      1. +4
        17 September 2023 12: 18
        Quote: Popandos
        The meaning of the article in a nutshell is a super engine but only for a tank, or a good engine for everyone.
        small series - expensive engine.
        large series - cheap engine.
        As they say, the choice is yours.

        IMHO, for a mass-produced tank this is a false and frankly harmful concept, which sharply worsens the main qualities of the tank in exchange for a meager profit from an economic point of view. Specifically, with numbers: 72 T-30000s were produced, but for civilians the volumes were conditionally comparable! Specifically: diesel locomotives 10000 units, river buses approximately 1000 units, etc. Those. It’s just about doubling the series, i.e. there was no significant impact on cost! Of course, if you plan a ridiculous series of 2000 tanks for the next 50 years, counting exclusively on low-intensity conflicts and military operations, then this concept will provide some kind of economic efficiency, but even if there are 2000 engines for the military, and 20000 for civilians, then the price engine performance will not drop by several times, but by percentages. What is the cost of the engine in the price of the tank? The tenth part is conditional. What is an increase in the cost of an engine, even by a gigantic 25% of a tenth of the cost of a tank? The tank as a whole will rise in price by a ridiculous 2,5%! How will we pay for this ridiculous saving? and a wild increase in the dimensions and weight of the tank, by 10-15 tons, which actually make up the difference between the Soviet and Western approaches to tank building (of course, the automatic loader also contributes to this difference).
        1. +3
          17 September 2023 13: 09
          Quote: Passing by

          for a mass-produced tank this is a false and frankly harmful concept that sharply worsens the main qualities of the tank

          Based on your logic, a tank only needs a super-duper engine, regardless of economics and manufacturability? Do I understand your post correctly?
          This reminds me of something, it seems, of the story of the middle of the last century, where technologically advanced tanks produced in the thousands at many factories were able to defeat super sophisticated tanks produced in the hundreds at a couple of factories.
          Let's learn history lessons, and not dance on a rake.
          For a war you need a lot of equipment that can be quickly produced, and all these prodigies like Leo2 and Challenger2 are good as long as they are in the rear, away from the LBS.
          1. +5
            17 September 2023 13: 31
            You understand me completely wrong. A modern tank requires a specialized diesel engine, with a key feature - a minimum specific volume, and the price for the specialization of a diesel engine is ridiculous compared to the cost of the tank. Your passage about the lessons of the Second World War flies by, I do not propose to achieve the minimum specific volume at any cost, and make a gas turbine engine, with a price of a third of the cost of the tank, but I propose not to pay exorbitant prices for the combat properties of the tank, for the sake of the false thesis that de-unification with a civilian will allow you to save significantly, and at the same time supposedly without losing anything. So my position is clearer?
  11. 0
    17 September 2023 07: 14
    Something is wrong with our engines! The V30 engine has been in production for 90 years now? Now they put it on Vesta too, 1.6 horsepower, this is when everyone is already on turbo and they remove it from 170 at XNUMX horsepower, it’s a disgrace! It’s good that at least something was done for cargo and military vehicles. If it weren’t for the war, they would have continued to install French engines, but our only one died completely from the eight.
    1. Egg
      0
      17 September 2023 08: 02
      Quote: Vadim S
      when everything is already on the turbo and is removed from the 1.6 at 170 horsepower, it’s a disgrace!

      Yeah yeah... and with a resource of 200 thousand km. Of course it’s better than naturally aspirated ones with a lifespan of a million kilometers laughing
      1. 0
        17 September 2023 16: 43
        Yeah, so that you can pass it on as an inheritance! Everything is rotten and hopelessly outdated, but the engine still chugs and runs, you live right!
      2. +4
        17 September 2023 18: 51
        VAZ engines have never lasted so long, after 100 thousand the zhor began, at 150 thousand...
        1. Egg
          +3
          19 September 2023 07: 11
          Quote: dnestr74
          VAZ engines have never lasted so long; after 100 thousand, the zhor began, at 150 thousand.

          We are not talking about VAZ engines, although on my VAZ 21063, born in 1986, the engine lasted 240 thousand km and did not consume oil. I sold it for disassembly due to somersaults with customs laws in the early nineties (mine was from Kazakhstan with local registration).
          Even today, 400-500 thousand engines from the same Logan can easily be maintained, and turbocharged 150 engines are at best. And remember how in the nineties there was a competition for mileage, even on every Kamaz it was written: “500 thousand without major repairs.” BMW and Mercedes engines calmly took care of 500 thousand each, and Toyota engines cost a million each.
          Quote: Vadim S
          Yeah, so that you can pass it on as an inheritance! Everything is rotten and hopelessly outdated, but the engine still chugs and runs, you live right!

          We don’t understand you majors, not everyone has the opportunity to change their car to a new one every 3 years, lining the pockets of disposable car manufacturers with their money.
          And 150 -200 thousand can easily be gained in 3-4 years, especially for those who like to go on vacation and to work in their own car.
  12. +2
    17 September 2023 07: 25
    As I understand it, the only justification for starting the T80 from scratch is that the T72 is slowly moving backwards?
    Brilliant solution.
    1. 0
      17 September 2023 16: 28
      Pedal to the floor and the T-72 will go backwards as it should. The T-100 with a shovel accelerated like that.
    2. 0
      18 September 2023 08: 16
      In terms of the totality of solutions, these are completely different machines... well, except for the generic characteristics of the tank))) when working on products, even at the level of the research institute, there were almost no intersections on topics... well, in fact, during the “test in battle” this set took off. ..yes, there was also an Afghan - but during this period the intensive development of the 219th took place
  13. +4
    17 September 2023 07: 41
    “The 1 hp gas turbine engine for the T-250BVM stands out.”
    It turns out we have 80 T-3000s in storage. Have you forgotten that we have a war called SVO? Let the engineers and designers do their work, but now we must devote all our efforts to victory. And we will reinvent the “wheel” later.
    "But this will happen after the special operation."
    And for it to end, I think we need political will, and not talk about negotiations.
  14. +2
    17 September 2023 07: 46
    The T-72B3 of the 2016 model was equipped with an engine of 1130 hp. - It was thanks to him that we won the Tank Biathlon, the Chinese could not keep up with us. Now, it turns out, they are installing a 1000-horsepower one - there is not enough more powerful one, everything goes to the T-90M?
  15. +4
    17 September 2023 08: 02
    Quote from Escariot
    The V-2 engine and its descendants were not actually used in civilian use. Only military production.

    Really? On the GTT, the engines are halves of the V-2 and their descendants; on the Vityaz, it or its descendants are also used, it is clear that this is all originally military equipment, but it has also done a lot of work for civilians. The entire north of our vastness on the GTT "Submitted"
  16. The comment was deleted.
  17. 0
    17 September 2023 08: 41
    The power density can also be increased by reducing the weight of the tank. To do this, you need to make an unmanned tank, which is not easy, but very simple! An unmanned tank does not require absolute armor or large volumes of armored space and can weigh from 10-15 tons with the same firepower.
    .
    It is necessary to single out separate design bureaus from existing tank ones with a single task: automation of existing models of military equipment.
    1. -3
      17 September 2023 12: 15
      I agree.
      A promising direction is a tank controlled by artificial intelligence.
      It's a pity that many specialists do not understand its capabilities.

      The West seems to be seriously developing cyborg terminators
      [media = https: //vk.com/video62136854_456239263]
      1. +4
        17 September 2023 21: 17
        Thanks for the answer, but counting on or promising AI control means completely compromising the idea. The bar of demands should be lowered. Today, completely different options are achievable, which can only be called AI in a propaganda frenzy. Well, for the purpose of receiving grants, as the word form “nano” was once used.
        In short, only saboteurs and fools can order control of an AI tank.
        1. 0
          17 September 2023 23: 09
          Thank you for your opinion. But I said about the prospect,
          about the trends in which the global military industry is moving.

          Leading countries will gradually give up weapons
          controlled by artificial intelligence systems.

          There are no other options.

          This war showed that the weak link in war is man.
          NATO's military industry can create many tanks.
          But where to find crews for them?
          There may not be such a freebie as there is now with the mass of pot-headed Nazis.

          The creation of AI-controlled aviation is happening right now, and from our side too.

          Is it achievable or not for us today to create tanks with AI?
          - that's another question. I didn't discuss it.
          But in order not to fall behind in the future, you need to start right now.
          1. 0
            18 September 2023 20: 40
            At one time, Norbert Wiener knew how to make a computer. But he himself did nothing except his famous lecture.
            I know how to make robotic weapons...
          2. 0
            20 September 2023 20: 15
            You should take it easy here with neurons and AI. On this resource, many still do not perceive UAVs at the vegetative level. There is a complete rejection of the body from the headlines of such articles. Then, as a result of an autoimmune reaction, they criticize the authors of these articles just for headlines with the abbreviation UAV.
            I wouldn’t be surprised if there are comments here that it would be best to replace diesel with a steam engine, and in the article about sixth-generation aircraft they shed a tear about airships.
  18. +1
    17 September 2023 08: 46

    I didn’t know that the V-2’s supercharging was mechanical. It turns out that this supercharging system came here from aviation.
    1. +3
      17 September 2023 09: 23
      So this diesel engine came from aviation, it was such a fashion in the 30s and 40s. The Germans flew diesel engines.
      1. +2
        17 September 2023 13: 18
        This engine was created by KhPZ - Kharkov Steam Locomotive Plant.
        There, some solutions were borrowed from the aviation Hispano-Suiza, but these engines were not used in aviation, unlike Charomsky’s 4-stroke diesel engines.
        1. +1
          17 September 2023 22: 44
          The V-2 originates from the AD-1 aviation diesel engine developed by the Kharkov ICE Research Institute, later UNIADI (Ya.M. Mayer), a set of documentation was transferred to KhPZ and formed the basis of the V-2. It goes without saying that changes were made to it, some based on Klimov’s ideas, which he observed in the M-100 (licensed Hispano-Suiza HS 12Y). After the arrests of the B-2 developers, T.P. was sent to Kharkov. Chupakhina and M.P. Poddubny, who had previously taken part in the development of the AN-1 Charomsky aviation diesel engine, which could not but affect the design of the B-2.
          Thus, the B-2 was not directly developed as an aircraft diesel engine, but its design originates from Mayer’s AD-1 aircraft diesel engine with ideas from other aircraft engines - Hispano-Suiza and Charomsky’s AN-1.
    2. +1
      17 September 2023 11: 53
      Back in the 70s, turbocharging was installed on 3D6 and 3D12 marine engines at Barnaul Transmash!
    3. 0
      18 September 2023 08: 20
      So there the whole engine came from aviation along with the drive supercharging)))
  19. +1
    17 September 2023 09: 22
    Why have two different tanks with the same weapons? When driving on rough terrain, the speed advantage is 20 km/h. goes down to 2 - 3 km/h. and depends mainly on the strength of the transmission.
    1. +1
      17 September 2023 13: 19
      The speed on the intersection is more determined by the suspension.
    2. +2
      25 October 2023 22: 38
      The number of T-80s in storage does not allow them to be abandoned so easily in the current situation. In addition, in most cases these are machines with almost unused resources.
  20. +6
    17 September 2023 09: 39
    The power of the promising engine is no less than 1 hp. pp., and the service life before the first overhaul is 700 hours or more.
    And all this without
    a significant increase in performance requires a radical change with strengthening of all engine components, which leads to the need for a major change in production,

    That is, there was no revolution in the diesel industry. No new units appeared that would suddenly almost double the power. It’s just that instead of modernizing the existing production, I wanted to build a new one. And instead of strengthening the well-developed design components of the previous engine, it is necessary to urgently release new ones, which have not yet been fully developed, with a lot of problems that have not yet been identified.
    So what do we see? Why was it necessary, without any clear reasons in the form of new discoveries and revolutionary inventions, to change the engine to a new one? There is a reason, and it is the only one. I'm really itching to grab royalties! Of course, the new engine will not be better than the old one. Due to the lack of those new ideas. But at least you will be able to place your pocket under the golden river!
    This, of course, fully justifies scrapping the process of refining an already well-studied engine. In which it is absolutely clear what will happen if this and that are strengthened, and this one is remade on modern processing complexes. The work will go smoothly, there is vast experience, production volumes will only increase.
    Who needs this? Tankers in the Northern Military District? Who are they?! Instead of “stupid retrogradeism,” let’s pour billions of dollars into production chains that do not yet exist! In conditions where they don’t sell us machine tools, this will be especially simple and cheap. Let's get the engine. Raw like the Black Sea! And we will finish it for another twenty years, constantly pushing more and more money into the process. The authors of the engine, and especially their patrons and sponsors, are quite ready to shoulder the heavy burden of processing more and more government billions! Your mother...
    1. +3
      17 September 2023 13: 28
      Unfortunately, you are wrong. B2 does not have a modernization potential of over 1000 hp. With. 1130 is from the evil one.
      In principle, 150 liters can be removed from this cylinder. s., and they did this on in-line 6-cylinder versions of the B6. But on a V-shape, trailing connecting rods do not work.
      Therefore, the 470 engine had adjacent connecting rods. And the Barnaul BMD project (Barnaul modular diesel) too.
      And 2B borrowed trailed ones.
      1. -4
        17 September 2023 17: 13
        Quote from: ln_ln
        Unfortunately, you are wrong. B2 does not have a modernization potential of over 1000 hp. With.

        Could you sell this to someone else? I'm an engineer after all. No potential? And we'll add a couple of cylinders. Is it really not possible? Well, you have to)) It’s possible. And the power will immediately increase in proportion to the addition. B2 actually had his thousand right away, back in the War. It was deformed later, for reliability, which could not be achieved on those machines. Then they returned the thousand to him. On machines from the early seventies. I bet, if you just make it on modern machining centers (and not the junk that is in the factory), it will simply produce more than a hundred horsepower gains as the tolerances increase? Hehe
        1. +6
          17 September 2023 17: 37
          We add two cylinders and we get a motor that no longer fits across the tank. At the same time, the load on the crankshaft increases. We change its dimensions and engine design, and immediately forget about interchangeability with the V-2. Well, onwards with all the stops.
        2. +3
          17 September 2023 21: 49
          I'm an engineer after all. No potential? And we'll add a couple of cylinders. Is it really not possible? Well, you have to)) It’s possible. And the power will immediately increase in proportion to the addition.

          As an engineer, you should know that scaling does not always give a proportional increase in performance.
        3. 0
          17 September 2023 22: 56
          And we'll add a couple of cylinders. Is it really not possible? Well, you have to)) It’s possible.
          - but the engine size will also change. By the way, how possible is it to scale power in this way?
        4. 0
          18 September 2023 19: 28
          "And we'll add a couple of cylinders."
          You have already been answered about the strength of the crankshaft and the dimensions.
          If you “add a couple of cylinders, what do you get? That’s right, V14! (7!!! in each row)
          And how will you deal with the angles of the cranks and the camber of the blocks? With balance? Maybe you are inspired by imported 5-cylinder in-line engines, since they do not do without additional rollers with counterweights (as on the UTD-20).
      2. +2
        17 September 2023 21: 24
        The main question is why? Why do we need an engine and a new tank if our soils and bridges do not allow increasing the weight of the vehicle? What new tactical possibilities will open up if the engine is changed? None!
        The requirement to develop a new tank and a new engine during the war is a sabotage against existing production. If there is extra money, it should be invested in communications, drones, detection and correction. there, for pennies you can increase the power of even old T-55s tenfold. A tenfold increase versus the 5% improvement promised by the authors of the article!
  21. 0
    17 September 2023 09: 57
    Approach the firing position, shoot off the ammunition and roll back - the faster, the less chance of getting under return fire. This works best in vehicles with high power density, for which the T-80BVM has no competitors. Well, yes, among domestic ones. Reverse instead of 5 km/h, as much as 12. An excellent indicator.
    1. +6
      17 September 2023 12: 45
      Quote: Igor Tarakanov
      shoot off the ammunition and roll back - the faster, the less chance of getting under return fire

      Quote: Igor Tarakanov
      This works best in vehicles with high power density, in which the T-80BVM has no competitors

      Increasing the power density beyond what has already been achieved on the T-72/90 is the very last thing that needs to be done in order to complete the combat mission faster and safer.
      And the first priority, because it is relatively easy to do, is to make a new gearbox with fast reverse for the T-72/90 family, and an electronic rear view for the driver, so that the frontal armor is always facing the enemy. And the second, much more difficult to achieve, but also more important, is to sharply increase the real combat rate of fire of the tank, because the point is not to suddenly jump out, shoot back and fly away at supersonic speed before the enemy comes to his senses, but the faster and more accurately you shoot at the enemy, the less likely it is that he will shoot back at you. Those. we need a faster automatic loader, better visibility and sighting, normal communications, network-centricity and all that.
      But launching an ancient design into series, spending gigantic resources on the development of mass production, in order to gain maximum speed ten seconds faster, go five kilometers per hour faster, this is outright sabotage, because for tank destruction weapons these meager increases are practically nothing This means, but a huge waste of the country’s very limited resources on an undertaking with scanty returns, instead of investing in what is really necessary and effective, is something that will certainly lead to a guaranteed loss.
    2. 0
      17 September 2023 13: 31
      If you give duplicate movement control to the commander, then you could swing it at 30 km/h.
    3. +1
      17 September 2023 19: 54
      Quote: Igor Tarakanov
      Approach the firing position, shoot off the ammunition and roll back - the faster, the less chance of getting under return fire. This works best in vehicles with high power density, for which the T-80BVM has no competitors. .
      It can set up the production of a 152mm self-propelled gun with a 55-60 caliber barrel to shoot from afar...
      The tank is needed for a FORWARD attack - to “disassemble” the support forces, use a “Tulip” 240mm mortar - “Tulip” does not fire quickly, but the siege mortar must be protected by counter-battery self-propelled guns and electronic warfare from suicide drones.
      hi
    4. 0
      18 September 2023 08: 24
      Mechaod, who knows this car 20 in reverse, gets
      1. +1
        18 September 2023 19: 16
        Tell me how ...
        Maybe downhill with the gear off?
        With reverse gear engaged, 20 km/h on the T-80 is definitely a separation of the power turbine. Yes, and the automatic will limit the speed.
  22. 0
    17 September 2023 10: 34
    Quote: Thrifty
    In Soviet times, we were given the following figures for the cost of tank engines: a diesel engine for a T72 in 1985 cost 3200 rubles, and a gas turbine engine for a T80 cost 170 thousand rubles. Are they too rich to restart production of a terribly expensive gas turbine? Its advantage is its quick start-up at severe subzero temperatures. Like on the Shilka, the turbine warms up the engine at startup, only when the turbine damper comes off during startup and a torch of about three meters flies out. Why do we need, by and large, a tank from yesterday with a terribly expensive and difficult to repair engine, who decided to break through the T80 armies?

    The price in the USSR had an accounting function and was determined by the relevant ministries. The price of a gas turbine engine is primarily the materials used in the hot part of the turbine, so there is no need to wring your hands. Better dig up data on labor costs.
    1. 0
      18 September 2023 08: 26
      Why do it again - CADVI is there, the series is there... in the dark the question of GTD1500 readiness
  23. 0
    17 September 2023 10: 35
    Quote: qqqq
    Quote: Thrifty
    How on Shilka the turbine warms up the engine when starting

    It doesn't heat anything up. The turbine on Shilka provides power, independent of engine operation. If without a turbine, then the engine must produce at least 2000 rpm, even at idle. The engine there is heated by an open flame from the injectors, where diesel is supplied. Almost exactly the same as on the T64.

    Yes, a torch heater was installed on all BTs.
  24. The comment was deleted.
    1. 0
      17 September 2023 13: 44
      I wrote that it is rare that one can be considered successful. Didn't they teach you to read more carefully? Otherwise, immediately accuse him of lying.
    2. 0
      17 September 2023 14: 33
      So today's Kolomna diesel engines have German pistons and rings.
  25. +8
    17 September 2023 12: 21
    Finally we decided to finish the epic with the B-2 clones. I started my career with these engines back in the late 70s. Now I’m retired, but they still dance around this engine. If someone thinks that a service life of 500 engine hours is normal, let him continue to think. This engine should have been discontinued back in the 80s. The X-shaped engine is also “happiness”. Here on the Hurricane, when you remove the injectors on the driver’s side, you almost stand on your ears. Servicing the X-shape will be another pleasure. Maybe we really need less exoticism? But who will do all this? The level of training of motor engineers has seriously declined during the period of "reforms", many design schools have been destroyed, factories have been destroyed. We need new industrialization and workers' faculties.
    1. +3
      17 September 2023 13: 36
      I completely agree about replacing the injectors on the X-shape. It will be the same as on 5TDF/6TD. Look how many hatches there are in the bottom, what exotic keys are included...
      1. +1
        17 September 2023 14: 07
        On Leo, the entire unit with the clutch and gearbox is pulled out for maintenance. This is on modern tanks. But maintenance must be done regularly. Fill with clean fuel from the tanker, and not from a bucket where dirt can get in. Then there is no need to change the nozzle. Change the fuel filter regularly. I am familiar with all this, how maintenance is carried out. That's why problems arise.
        1. +2
          17 September 2023 15: 11
          On the T-80 everything is equipped for closed jet refueling. Plus a water sensor in the supply tank, because no one has canceled the condensate. Stainless steel tanks.
          Monoblock (engine and transmission with systems) began to be used since the M46. So there it had to be pulled out even to replace the thin fuel filter. In addition, with a monoblock it is usually not possible to provide circulation lubrication to the final drives.
          There is also the problem of preserving fuel equipment during storage; it was best solved on the YaAZ-204/206.
      2. 0
        18 September 2023 08: 31
        Sorry, but the issue of separately changing injectors in this operating paradigm is not worth it - removing the MTO should not exceed 1 hour ... and it needs to be removed for routine maintenance ... and that percentage should not be done in principle on a separately diseased weather injector
        1. 0
          18 September 2023 19: 35
          This is if new monoblocks are brought to you by helicopter.
        2. 0
          20 September 2023 11: 03
          It’s just that you’ve never been involved in servicing heavy equipment, apparently. The aggregate method of maintenance and repair is good in theory, but life presents a lot of new inputs.
        3. 0
          20 September 2023 11: 03
          It’s just that you’ve never been involved in servicing heavy equipment, apparently. The aggregate method of maintenance and repair is good in theory, but life presents a lot of new inputs.
    2. 0
      17 September 2023 21: 58
      Servicing the X-shape will be another pleasure

      Totally agree negative fool belay
  26. 0
    17 September 2023 12: 55
    A new engine based on the old one is another cut of the dough.... and nothing more... Engine 2V-12-3A. "The first vehicle to try on the new product was the T-72. This suggests that the product's dimensions fit into the engine compartment of a production tank." And it didn't fit in a damn... An "opendix" appeared behind the turret. Which made it impossible to use guns in the rear sphere.. Let's add a small margin of safety (it is not high enough on Armata either) and. the tank could not become a “peacetime tank.” It was for these reasons that this engine was not accepted for service..
    1. +2
      17 September 2023 15: 22
      The first in the 2B series was a 16-cylinder.



      And in this version he had better balance
      1. -1
        17 September 2023 17: 32
        Quote from: ln_ln
        And in this version he had better balance
        And what are the reasons for switching to a 12-cylinder of the same power?
        1. 0
          18 September 2023 19: 38
          The customer wanted it shorter... (It is installed along the machine).
          1. 0
            18 September 2023 20: 45
            Quote from: ln_ln
            The customer wanted it in short...
            Why invent it? The 16-cylinder was problematic, but the 12 was quite successful. Read the history of the creation of this engine.
            Here is the ejection cooling of the Object 219RD engine - this, yes, was a customer requirement.
      2. 0
        17 September 2023 18: 10
        Quote from: ln_ln
        The first in the 2B series was a 16-cylinder.
        This is “Object 219RD”
        .....project “Object 219RD”, which appeared at the very end of the seventies. The T-80, which had been put into service shortly before, had good characteristics, which were provided by a gas turbine engine with a capacity of 1000 horsepower. However, the price to pay for the relatively high speed and ease of operation in winter conditions was too much fuel consumption. The cruising range of the T-80 was significantly less than that of other Soviet main tanks of the time. In addition, the gas turbine power plant cost an order of magnitude more than a diesel engine of similar power. Therefore, already in the late seventies, the Ministry of Defense initiated the development of a tank modernization project, the goal of which was to preserve the driving performance of the armored vehicle, while simultaneously increasing fuel efficiency and reducing the cost of the finished tank.

        At this time, the designers of the Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant were working on the creation of a family of 2B tank diesel engines. It was planned to make several four-stroke X-shaped engines with power from 300 to 1600 horsepower. It was the engine of the 2B family that was chosen as the power plant for the new modification of the T-80 tank, called “Object 219RD”. The development of new engines had a remarkable history. Initially, in 1976-77, a 16-cylinder diesel engine with a capacity of 1000 hp was designed at ChTZ. However, by the time the design work was completed, it became clear that the defense industry did not need such a motor. All the tanks on which it could work were already equipped with other types of engines. Therefore, on the basis of the resulting 2V-16-1, they began to create a more powerful 2V-16-2 with a maximum power of up to 1200 hp.

        Using the 2V-16-2 engine, Chelyabinsk engineers created the MTU-2 engine-transmission unit, which was an engine and transmission assembled into a single unit. This approach to design was used for the first time in Soviet practice. Other features of the installation include a hydrodynamic transmission, an electro-hydraulic control system, original cooling units, and air filters. The monoblock propulsion system occupied a volume of only 3,6 cubic meters.

        In the early eighties, one of the serial T-80B tanks was reworked to the state of "Object 219RD". The original power plant with a gas turbine engine was removed from it, the place of which was taken by the MTU-2 unit. The motor-transmission monoblock showed itself well already at the installation stage. In the course of checking the maintainability of the tank with it, a team of four repairmen was able to replace the engine and transmission in just 65-70 minutes. It is worth noting that not only Leningrad designers from the Kirov Plant, who created the Object 80RD, took up the modernization of the T-219B. At the same time, the Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant was designing the Object 785 tank with a similar power plant. A characteristic feature of the new Chelyabinsk experimental tank was a longer hull with seven road wheels on board. Only one instance of such an armored vehicle was built, mass production did not begin.

        The Object 219RD, which received new power plant units, turned out to be slightly heavier than the original T-80B and weighed almost 44 tons. Due to the fact that the power is 1200 hp. was maximum for the 2V-16-2 engine, the performance characteristics of the new tank were slightly lower than those of the base model. The maximum speed of the Object 219RD decreased to 60-65 kilometers per hour, which, however, was compensated by a large power reserve. Due to the less voracious diesel engine, it could cover about 500 km on one refueling........
        1. +1
          21 September 2023 16: 34
          Well, what problems did you find with 2B-16?
  27. +1
    17 September 2023 13: 40
    Hence the question - how to maintain the economic feasibility of production on a tank conveyor? Don’t forget, Russia lives in a market economy, and it may happen that even a fully developed 2B-12-3A will simply not be needed by anyone except tank crews. A small series means an exorbitant cost, which entails a lot of problems

    It’s strange, the Germans and British also seem to live in a market economy, but for more than twenty years they have been producing the EuroPowerPack power plant in Germany, consisting of an MTU MT883 Ka-500/501 diesel engine with a power of 1500 -1650 hp. and ten-speed (five forward, five back) automatic transmission Renk HSWL 295TM.
    And they sell it all over the world - Challenger 2E, Merkava Mk. 4. Arjun, K2 Black Panther, Leclerc tropicalisé. Now the Germans with the Leopard and the Americans, who are seriously engaged in the transition from gas turbine engines to diesel, have joined this ranks.
    1. -1
      17 September 2023 20: 30
      So they print dollars and can produce whatever they want.. Excuse me, there are 1.5 billion people in one country (the Western world is one country), but we have 150 million, so you shouldn’t be surprised at the technological backwardness in certain areas..
    2. 0
      17 September 2023 22: 12
      however, the EuroPowerPack power unit has been produced in Germany for more than twenty years

      That’s why they produce because there is demand and all these:
      Challenger 2E, Merkava Mk. 4. Arjun, K2 Black Panther, Leclerc tropicalisé.
      They buy it because it’s cheaper than making their own. Clean economics.
    3. +1
      18 September 2023 08: 58
      The Americans put 10 automobile engines on a Sherman tank, and won the war, and rationally
      1. +1
        18 September 2023 19: 42
        Not 10, but 5.
        And don’t laugh at this Chrysler Multibank. Everything was done very cleverly there.
  28. +1
    17 September 2023 15: 14
    I would like to believe that this is the light at the end of the tunnel, and (...) there are developments on a promising engine.

    I no longer want to believe in the existence of any developments. I want to see real things. Judging by the article, there is a dead end at the end of the tunnel.
    1. -3
      17 September 2023 17: 01
      Whether you want it or not, developments are ongoing.
      Here they made 2B-06-3, V-shaped instead of opposed. Like, for Kurganets.
  29. +2
    17 September 2023 15: 52
    Quote: also a doctor
    An unmanned tank does not require absolute armor or large volumes of armored space and can weigh from 10-15 tons with the same firepower.

    An unmanned tank weighing 10-15 tons will be hit by a heavy machine gun.
    1. +1
      17 September 2023 21: 45
      Shaheed mobiles are also hit, or rather they should be hit. But for some reason they are not amazed.
      The tank cannot be considered in isolation from tactics. An unmanned tank is not afraid of death, and therefore will be a priori more effective than a tank with a crew. To complete a combat mission, armor is needed several times less than to save the crew. Also, the armor and weight will be less, as the dimensions will be reduced.
  30. +1
    17 September 2023 16: 57
    GTE is a thing in itself. On the one hand, excellent power parameters, on the other hand, a more inert reaction to the control input (pressed the gas pedal, but unlike a 4-stroke engine, nothing happens, the engine “gains strength” and only then acceleration/acceleration follows) and a completely different level production and service culture.

    We have already written about the x-shaped scheme, as well as about the crisis of science and production. So why not take and copy the MTU diesel? It has high, well-balanced characteristics.

    Just don’t write about patent law, licenses, etc. “Leopard” is a legitimate military trophy and we have every right to take the best from it. If someone in the West is outraged by this, then it’s worth recalling how the tanks ended up in the Russian Federation.
    1. +1
      17 September 2023 17: 11
      The Leo-2 series does not yet have 883 engines with 295 transmissions, but the pair costs 873 + 354 and takes up 7 cubic meters.
      Not sure if this is a good choice for copying.
      873, actually a good engine, pre-chamber, really multi-fuel, but too healthy.
      The gas turbine engine is "thoughtful" if you drive according to the instructions. And if you want to live, then you set the gas sector to 100% and control the adjustable nozzle apparatus and brake. At the Last Judgment you will not have to account for fuel.
      1. +1
        17 September 2023 17: 25
        I’m not sure if it’s 7. As far as I remember, the engine itself is one and a half cubic meters. 7 - apparently with a transmission and auxiliary units, of which the Germans traditionally have a lot.
      2. +2
        17 September 2023 17: 43
        I looked, 5 cubic meters is the transmission, the engine itself is 1,5.
  31. +1
    17 September 2023 17: 02
    There will be nothing new - they will continue to drive the engine from the T-34...
    I especially liked the one about Russia in a market economy, which is not interested in the excessive gluttony of a gas turbine engine... :)
    1. 0
      17 September 2023 17: 18
      Voracity plays a role at the operational level, but in a positional deadlock, tactical mobility is more important.
      1. 0
        17 September 2023 17: 29
        Tanks were created in order to break the deadlock.
  32. 0
    17 September 2023 19: 03
    That is, we are no longer talking about the x-shaped layout, and the v-shaped layout with a camber angle of 60–90 degrees is considered “the most optimal, both from the point of view of the layout of the engine itself and its placement in the engine-transmission compartment (MTO) of the tank, and and from the point of view of manufacturability and less labor intensity in production compared to other schemes.”

    Was it really impossible to assess the futility of the X-shaped design in advance, so as not to waste money and time? Now it turns out that Armata is suspended indefinitely. And who will be responsible for this? As usual - soldiers at the front with their lives?
    1. 0
      17 September 2023 19: 25
      I think that the problems were obvious, but there was no alternative, and the pressure that an engine was needed was growing. Plus optimism that we can overcome it.
    2. +1
      17 September 2023 19: 47
      The teacher told us about the dead end of the X-shaped layout in 1990.
    3. +1
      18 September 2023 09: 43
      The deadlock was appreciated back in the USSR, but in our time they simply sawed up for R&D and gave out the OPP of the times of galoshes for new engines. In general, hundreds of billions were sawed up in the Soviet backlog and maybe we are talking about trillions. For example, the Rybinsk Saturn received more than 30% of its revenue annually in in the form of subsidies for R&D, not counting subsidies for SAM-148 for the superjet.
  33. -1
    17 September 2023 19: 49
    For me, the future lies in gas turbine engines based on new technologies
    1. 0
      17 September 2023 20: 15
      At least keep the old technologies.
      Of the availability for Armata, there is only a gas turbine engine.
  34. +1
    17 September 2023 20: 39
    Quote: Passing by
    ... I propose not to pay exorbitant prices for the combat properties of a tank, for the sake of the false thesis that de-unification with civilian life will allow significant savings...

    Thank you for clarifying your position. Here you and I are entering the field of eternal compromises, and in vain you do not want to remember the experience of past wars.
    And it shows that while there is an opportunity (peacetime), you need to try to make a tank (plane, rocket, etc.) with maximum parameters, but during war you need technologically advanced, mass-produced designs, and they are far from design delights.
    I am not at all against our vehicles being equipped with engines with better characteristics, but then you and I should discuss the gas turbine engine and not the diesel engine, because the gas turbine engine can give the tank maximum performance, but in all economic parameters it will be the worst option.
  35. -1
    17 September 2023 20: 43
    It’s strange that they say it’s impossible to develop a normal engine, the YaMZ-536 in the Euro-0 version with 6.7 liters produces 451 hp and a resource of half a kilometer, the YaMZ-780 750 hp with 12.43 liters and engine builders say that they could squeeze out a thousand, but the military they said 750 would be enough, with a service life of 2500 engine hours at a minimum, that is, you make a V-12 with a volume of 25 liters from a straight six and get 1500 l/s .. yes, it will weigh one and a half tons, but it’s cast iron, not aluminum like on the V-2, but it has a resource and Changing the oil is not after just one refueling, and the consumption of both oil and fuel is by no means tank-grade, and yes, we need to end with the nonsense about all-fuel, pour normal diesel into the tank and that’s it.. A normal modern engine can be made, but it feels like there’s nothing stupid in Chelyabinsk they don’t want to change and want to produce the B-2 forever because the factories have been built, the equipment is working, people are trained..
    1. 0
      17 September 2023 21: 15
      With tank engines, not everything is so simple - they operate in a closed volume, and therefore are more heat-loaded. This causes problems with materials and resources.

      Those. The idea with YaMZ is logical - to make an army engine based on the civilian section (cylinder-piston-connecting rod). But there will be many pitfalls when implementing it, and it’s not a fact that it will work out. It's worth a try. Just when and who will do it? Moreover, this motor was needed 30 years ago. How long will it take to develop a new one now?
      1. +1
        18 September 2023 09: 51
        Quote: _KM_
        Just when and who will do it?

        Who has been making engines in recent years? Who made the YaMZ-780? Who is Kamaz P6 series? How did they manage to do this for the Aurus ICE? Who makes “product 30” and other new engines? The country has everything, personnel for design and personnel and technological capacity for production, we need the will to produce and financing for production. About some special tank engines, this is an urban legend from the 30s of the 30th century. There are two the most important characteristics are power and torque, then the “shelf” torque in terms of revolutions, and only then the rest resource, efficiency and so on, what they use the decision of the XNUMXs is not for scientific and technological reasons, but for lobbyist economic reasons. -kami of a tank but devoid of its shortcomings, you need to invest money and control its spending. When they really look for a solution to a problem, for some reason they find it very quickly, but here for almost a hundred years “they can’t do anything.”
  36. +2
    17 September 2023 21: 36
    Do designers have any new ideas? Or maybe they should just be paid fairly and freed from the stifling influence of effective managers? I can directly see how defective ones prohibit changing the design, using new materials, because then money for R&D and equipment cannot be stolen.
    .
    Even I, an idiot, see promising solutions. Yes, at least install two old TDF-5s, and you will be happy. 2000 horses, after all, in the volume of one B-2.
    Will you have to transport it on trailers outside of combat? So a trailer is 10 times cheaper than a tank.
    Cooling problems? Place some of the radiators outside the armor with the ability to automatically turn off the broken sections, and replace them after the battle. You install the air vents outside... Install the radiators as well.
    Is it difficult to manage two engines and a transmission? What about electronics?
    .
    There are even more serious ideas.
    1. +1
      17 September 2023 21: 49
      They will pierce this external radiator with a machine gun burst or shrapnel, and the tank will stop, because... the engine will seize.

      To use new materials and technologies you must have them. And for this you need a lot of things. And this should have been done not even yesterday, but years ago.

      Generally speaking, engine building is difficult, expensive and time-consuming. So it was, so it is, and so it will be for a very long time.

      What do we have now? Apart from immense optimism and the belief that a tank engine is garbage, put any engine in a metal box and it will work fine?

      request
      1. -1
        18 September 2023 21: 01
        A tank lives in war for a week or less. Therefore, there is no need for absolute reliability. We were lucky, the engine broke down earlier - we need to think about making it easier to replace the engine on one surviving tank out of a hundred.
        Also with external radiators. They hit it, which means we need to crawl out of the battle without accelerating and in reverse on the remaining sections and internal radiators.
        .
        I will repeat again, it’s time to abandon the prohibitive requirements for military equipment in terms of versatility and reliability. The requirements for technology should be determined by the tactics of application and vice versa. If, as the author of the article writes, power is needed to jump out, shoot and escape, then you can escape with a steamed radiator and with half the engine power.
        .
        And, I repeat, there are more serious proposals.
    2. +2
      17 September 2023 21: 53
      There are also old ideas



      [Center]

      The last one is the ship's MTU 40 H 672 7000 l. With.

      And there was also the Napier Saber.

      Place 2 pieces of 2B-06 in such a bookcase.
      1. 0
        17 September 2023 22: 16
        One may recall the use of radial engines on American tanks of World War II. )
        1. 0
          18 September 2023 16: 22
          Just remember the height of these tanks and high-octane gasoline, and they burned like candles.
          1. 0
            18 September 2023 17: 30
            All tanks are on fire, vapors from any fuel are dangerous. But in this case we are not talking about fuel, but about design. Those. If you go to extremes, then there are places.)
          2. 0
            18 September 2023 19: 53
            Better “high-octane gasoline” in MTO than diesel fuel in combat.
  37. +3
    17 September 2023 22: 00



    Yes, the Leo has a 7 cubic meter power unit, but now they have reduced the volume. The engine accounts for 1,5 cubic meters. The rest is the transmission, attachments and cooling system.
  38. 0
    17 September 2023 22: 19
    Quote from: ln_ln
    At the Last Judgment you will not have to account for fuel.

    Today's best topic...
  39. +3
    17 September 2023 22: 26
    The gas turbine engine accelerates slowly not because of problems with fuel consumption, but because of the peculiarities of the working process. The best acceleration characteristics (“responsiveness”) are found in a naturally aspirated four-stroke engine.
    1. 0
      17 September 2023 22: 40
      Not the peculiarities of the working process, but the high moment of inertia of the turbochargers.
      1. +1
        17 September 2023 22: 42
        Blisk has a small mass and moment of inertia, and friction is small.
        1. 0
          17 September 2023 23: 45
          What is blisk?


          The height of the engine is about a meter, you can estimate the diameter of the impellers.
          1. +3
            18 September 2023 00: 20
            bladed disk - a compressor stage whose blades are integral with the rotor disk.
  40. -1
    17 September 2023 22: 52
    Instead of copyright speculation, it is high time to conduct comparative tests of the T-90 M with a 1130 hp diesel engine. With. and T-80BVM with gas turbine 1250hp
    The difference is only 120 hp. (about 10% of power) will have virtually no effect on the movement of the tank over rough terrain at a speed of 50-60 km/h, and racing on the highway at maximum speed is simply not relevant for war...

    If we combine all the pros and cons in terms of maintainability, reliability, and fuel consumption, then the T-90M will receive the title of best main tank for ground forces with a clear advantage.

    If Omsk actually resumes production of new tanks, then these should be vehicles that are as unified as possible with the T-90M, or better yet, a complete copy of it.
    Modernized T-80BVMs with sufficient gas turbine engine life should enter service with Arctic brigades and units of the Northern Fleet MP and Pacific Fleet.
    1. +3
      17 September 2023 23: 48
      1130 is a white lie.
      “over rough terrain at a speed of 50-60 km/h” - do you want to break your spine?

      If you look at the book by Kolmakov and Ustyantsev about the T-72, there are appendices, in particular, stories from test participants, and one of them spoke categorically: “We have created a very reliable machine with very low maintainability.”
      Try to get to the VKU (rotating contact device) on the T-72.
    2. +1
      17 September 2023 23: 54
      Well, that’s how all the tests are done in the SVO! Once again, our one tank accidentally ended up against an armored column of the VSUK. Once is an accident, the second is already a pattern.... and how long do we not know that such outings ended sadly for ours?
  41. -1
    17 September 2023 23: 52
    I wonder what kind of light we are talking about if it’s just a quiet one)) 2V-12-3A everyone) created a freak that in the end it is IMPOSSIBLE to bring to mind and replace it with something else) because this is our everything.. we’ll buy) bought))) ) are you going to restore the T80?) Or, as usual, while there is still something left in the dumps, they will pass it off as new, as was the case with the T-980 at first, that the hulls were ready at the factory... in stock
  42. 0
    18 September 2023 00: 25
    A tank needs high power not so much to increase average speed, but to improve acceleration dynamics. In addition, the B-2 really needs a replacement.
  43. 0
    18 September 2023 09: 05
    Quote: Roman Efremov
    Quote: also a doctor
    An unmanned tank does not require absolute armor or large volumes of armored space and can weigh from 10-15 tons with the same firepower.

    An unmanned tank weighing 10-15 tons will be hit by a heavy machine gun.


    The smaller the armored volume, the smaller the size of the tank, the less armor of the same thickness, the lower the total mass, the smaller the engine, the smaller the abandoned volume, etc. and we get a 10 ton tank with the same characteristics as a 60 ton tank...
  44. 0
    18 September 2023 09: 52
    Quote: _KM_
    Blisk has a small mass and moment of inertia, and friction is small.

    This is not what was written to you - the amount of air involved in combustion and the production of useful work depends on the number of revolutions of the compressor. To accelerate the compressor stages and create the necessary pressure in the compressor, it takes 3-4 seconds. Therefore, the response to control inputs in the gas turbine engine is relatively slow. But it also has the advantage of relatively long operation at maximum power compared to a diesel engine, and of course starting in cold weather. Anyone who has run around the park with batteries knows this.
    1. 0
      18 September 2023 11: 56
      Quote: Foma Kinyaev
      This is not what was written to you - the amount of air involved in combustion and the production of useful work depends on the number of revolutions of the compressor. It takes 3-4 seconds to accelerate the compressor stages and create the required pressure in the compressor. Therefore, the response to control inputs in the gas turbine engine is relatively slow. But it also has the advantage of relatively long operation at maximum power compared to a diesel engine, and of course starting in cold weather. Anyone who has run around the park with batteries knows this.


      I initially wrote that the turbine, due to its characteristics, is more inert. You just told me this again. Thank you.

      As for long-term operation at maximum power, this is good for aviation and navy, possibly for railways. Ground transport engines operate at partial loads most of the time, and in this mode gas turbine engines are less economical and less adaptable to changes in loads.

      In addition, gas turbine engines have high specific and absolute air consumption and high requirements for air purity. With a decrease in the degree of purification, the resource of the power plant is significantly reduced.

      The turbine cannot brake the engine, which means more powerful brakes and their cooling are needed, because On long descents they will get very hot.

      Therefore, tanks with a gas turbine engine, with a smaller volume of the turbine itself, do not have much gain in the volume of the engine-transmission compartment. Plus the cost, which is an order of magnitude higher than diesel.

      Another potential problem is associated with the complexity of manufacturing gas turbine engines and a different culture of production and maintenance. If it is necessary to quickly deploy or increase the production of gas turbine engines, this will not be possible.

      The USSR has played enough with turbines. Their creation took more than ten years, plus years of implementation and development. Now we are stepping on the same rake again. Instead of creating our own diesel engine (or copying a foreign one), we again “fit” into the long-term construction with a turbine.
      1. +1
        18 September 2023 12: 59
        Quote: _KM_
        The turbine cannot brake the engine, which means more powerful brakes and their cooling are needed, because On long descents they will get very hot.

        "...The vehicle is braked by the engine by turning the RSA to the braking position when the brake pedal is partially moved and connecting the mechanical brakes when moving it further. When stopping the car, the fuel pedal 22 is released and the brake pedal 20 is depressed, which leads to the RSA turning into the brake position position....." http://www.alexfiles99.narod.ru/engine/gtd1000/gtd-1000_control.htm
        1. 0
          18 September 2023 22: 27
          During testing, the system showed insufficient efficiency and response speed. Perhaps now, adding electronics to it will be better, but it still cannot be compared with an engine brake.
          1. +1
            18 September 2023 23: 30
            Quote: _KM_
            During testing, the system showed insufficient efficiency and response speed.
            During testing, there was a case when a tank with a running engine fell from a ferry into the water. Drowned completely. After being pulled ashore, the engine was revved up and the tank drove away under its own power. If I remember correctly, it took less than an hour to resuscitate the tank. With a diesel engine, this number would not work.
            True, the T-80 does not start from a tug (the complaint was made by high authorities)
            1. 0
              18 September 2023 23: 57
              A diesel would have water hammer. Nevertheless, diesel tanks walked perfectly on the bottom, but the T-80 had difficulties with this. Perhaps over time they would have been overcome, but “democracy” came, the collapse of the state and army. And everyone suddenly had no time for tanks.
              1. +1
                19 September 2023 00: 32
                Quote: _KM_
                Nevertheless, diesel tanks walked perfectly on the bottom, but the T-80 had difficulties with this.
                I haven't heard of any difficulties with underwater driving for the T-80. Simply, instead of one pipe they put two: one for air, the other for exhaust. But diesel tanks have their own difficulties. In the T-62-72-90, during underwater driving, the transmission is tightly sealed and the engine cooling system operates accordingly. In general, it’s easy to overheat the engine if you drive it underwater a little longer. The T-64 has the exact opposite problem: their engine has a chance of overcooling, since during underwater driving the radiator is completely flooded with water.
                1. 0
                  19 September 2023 00: 44
                  You partly answered your own question. Air flow is higher and exhaust gas pressure is lower. More precisely, turbine gases.
                  1. 0
                    19 September 2023 00: 55
                    Quote: _KM_
                    You partly answered your own question. Air flow is higher and exhaust gas pressure is lower. More precisely, turbine gases.
                    And this is a problem?! And the diesel T-62-72-90 exhausts through valves at a depth of several meters under water, which is why they have no power during underwater driving?
      2. +2
        18 September 2023 13: 20
        “GTEs have high specific and absolute air flow rates and high requirements for air purity”
        With centrifugal compressors, cleaning requirements are lower. The T-80 single-stage air cleaner cleans approximately 98%, while diesel requires 99,7%. This is where a solution emerged, such as two-stage air cleaning on turbodiesels, when a cyclonic air cleaner stage is installed before the turbocharger, and a contact one after. As an option, the first cascade is forward-flow cyclones, the second is reverse-flow.

        “The turbine cannot brake with the engine, which means that more powerful brakes and their cooling are needed, because on long descents they will heat up greatly.”
        Effective service inhibition is an extremely important issue that is not realized by many. As the saying goes, "good brakes increase average speed."
        The Klimovsky gas turbine engine has a braking power of about 50% of the rated traction power, for this purpose the braking position of the adjustable nozzle apparatus (ASA) of the free turbine is used. This is not enough, so the T-80 transmission is now equipped with hydrodynamic brakes (retarders), which, given the limited performance of the transmission oil cooling system, is not very great. On the first prototypes of retarders, the paint burned off.
        N. F. Galitsky from the Leningrad Korabelka in 1990 proposed and calculated, in the dimensions of a serial gas turbine engine, an engine with an URST (acceleration-reversible power turbine) in the manner of Zaporozhye ship engines. This gives a multiple increase in braking power, and the reverse speed is almost equal to the forward speed. The afterburner combustion chamber in front of the power turbine provides 80% additional thrust and allows the installed power to be reduced. The nominal value was 1000 l. pp., afterburner - 1800. Price - reworking the power turbine assembly with gearbox and increasing fuel consumption in traction mode (without afterburner) by 3-5%. But if, having afterburner, you drive according to the instructions, keeping the speed of the high-pressure turbocharger (TKII) at 90%, and not 100%, then the travel consumption will only decrease.
        1. 0
          18 September 2023 23: 28
          A diesel engine has lower requirements for air purification, and less air is needed. With a centrifugal turbine the situation is simpler, but it is less efficient and economical. The afterburner also does not help fuel economy. The speed has to be maintained not based on efficiency, but on the road conditions.
          1. 0
            21 September 2023 16: 48
            A diesel engine has much higher air purification requirements. I have given you the required purification coefficients.
            As can be seen from the above figure, all 3 turbines on a tank gas turbine engine are axial. Centrifugal compressors are the ones that are less sensitive to dust.
            The afterburner combustion chamber helps reduce fuel consumption while cruising by allowing the rated power to be reduced.
  45. 0
    18 September 2023 09: 55
    Quote: smith 55
    I wrote that it is rare that one can be considered successful. Didn't they teach you to read more carefully? Otherwise, immediately accuse him of lying.

    Pedaling problems in the mechanical engineering of the USSR without real statistics and an analytical review and comparison with the Russian Federation means that the critic is a rattle on the salary.
  46. 0
    18 September 2023 10: 09
    We constantly have problems with engines. And even more so now, when the situation is ruled not by result-oriented engineers, but by managers who care only about the process from which they can make money. To be honest, it is not clear why they gave 6TD to Ukraine. Nothing stopped them from producing it even without civilian demand.
  47. 0
    18 September 2023 10: 19
    Quote: Igor Tarakanov
    Approach the firing position, shoot off the ammunition and roll back - the faster, the less chance of getting under return fire. This works best in vehicles with high power density, for which the T-80BVM has no competitors. Well, yes, among domestic ones. Reverse instead of 5 km/h, as much as 12. An excellent indicator.


    Igor, this is only true in toys - in WoT, for example, but in real life, I drove into a 90-degree turn and also need to exit, what speed can there be? if only you install a rear view camera - so that you can leave the first time...
  48. 0
    18 September 2023 12: 04
    Quote: anclevalico
    To be honest, it is not clear why they gave 6TD to Ukraine. Nothing stopped them from producing it even without civilian demand.


    When 5TD was created in the union and the question of its production arose, it turned out that no one except KhTZ could produce it.

    The engine is complex and heat-loaded, and the cooling situation is very difficult. Other factories simply weren’t up to it, or maybe they didn’t want to radically change production.

    In addition, a 2-stroke engine is less powerful than a 4-stroke engine. For aviation and navy this is not a problem, but for a tank it is an important point.
    1. 0
      18 September 2023 12: 49
      "When 5TD was created in the union"
      It was created at KhZTM (not KhTZ).
      KhTZ is the developer and manufacturer of MT-LB.
      1. 0
        18 September 2023 13: 51
        Yes, I made a mistake in the heat of discussion. You're right.
  49. 0
    18 September 2023 12: 43
    It's strange that there is still no news about the development of a hybrid powertrain. Place an electric motor on each side, a generator in the engine compartment and small batteries as a buffer. Which gives a bunch of goodies both in terms of the design as a whole, as well as new operating modes: “quiet” on Akum, “boost” when using a generator and Akum for discharge. And a twin-engine layout logically suggests itself for side turn signals. The design is much easier to implement, although there are some disadvantages.
    There are many more advantages, and the disadvantages can be eliminated as experience is gained.
    1. 0
      18 September 2023 13: 06
      This news was still in the T-10 and Is7 tanks
    2. 0
      18 September 2023 13: 37
      The fundamental drawback is the overload of the electric motor of the running board and the power converter with the circulating power in the turn. For example, the Germans made a model at the Marder base, where the generator was 440 kW, and both traction motors were 750 kW.
      Hybrids require more sophisticated multi-threaded circuits.
      There was an IS-6 version (1946) with an electric transmission. In Gruzdev's textbook (1943), the praises of electric transmission were sung...
  50. +1
    18 September 2023 13: 06
    Now civilian diesel engines are becoming very advanced and are being localized in the Russian Federation. At least in special equipment there is no longer a need to use special motors like V-2 (and its analogues). For example, a diesel engine from KAMAZ (nee Liebherr) with 12 liters of volume and P6 produces 450-75 hp. If you make a V12 (24-30l) you can get 1000-1500hp. and this is with a civilian resource - 1-2 million km.
    1. +3
      18 September 2023 13: 45
      How much will this million kilometers of yours weigh?
      For example: UTD-20 (15/15, 16 liters, 300 hp) 660 kg, KamAZ-740 (12/12, 11 liters, 210 hp) 950 kg.
      1. +1
        18 September 2023 14: 43
        - Length - 1260mm x Width - 930mm x Height - 1045mm. - Weight is about 900 kg. - Engine weight with filled liquids - 930 kg.

        This is a P6 with a power of 450-750hp. And a Euro 0 version was announced, with an increased volume of up to 13 liters

        Or YaMZ 770 12l 45-650 hp 1050kg


        So these are millionaires with low consumption and ecology.
    2. 0
      18 September 2023 14: 20
      The shipbuilder Academician Krylov spoke best about the required resource of military equipment in the book “My Memoirs,” comparing Noviki and French destroyers.
      1. 0
        18 September 2023 14: 48
        Many people spoke out.....I read about the post-war La7 and La9...air defense fighters...2-3 years and everything was scrapped. If it is possible to install a civilian Diesel and a box, you need to install.....
        1. 0
          18 September 2023 15: 35
          Quote: Zaurbek
          If it is possible to install a civilian Diesel and a box, you need to install.....
          The Chinese installed a German licensed diesel engine on the clone of our tank. The tank has become almost a meter longer.
          1. 0
            18 September 2023 16: 17
            Compare T34 and T54... The diesel engine is the same, the length of the MTO is different. The MTU (+ box) stands longitudinally, while we have the T44 transversely..... The X-diset stands longitudinally on the T14, by the way. But the MTO block itself is quadratish-practical
          2. 0
            18 September 2023 20: 06
            Yes, Type 99 (nee Type 98) is a strange machine, a carrier of technology, the concept is not visible.
            Note that I'm not saying he'll be bad in war.
        2. 0
          18 September 2023 20: 00
          Read Krylov.
          There are not many such people.
  51. -1
    18 September 2023 16: 05
    Industry leaders need eternal development, no matter what: money comes from the budget, but the result is very late, either a donkey or a check... Why not buy a license for the production of diesel from the French or Germans in times of boundless love between us? And improve for another hundred years. Why adapt a tank engine to civilian needs? It will turn out to be an expensive civilian. Make universal components where possible and sufficient. What civilians use the engine from the T-80, engines from fighter jets? How much fun did you have discussing the reversing capabilities of Western tanks? We just move forward.... "we can repeat it".... We realized that the tank needed to shoot back and get out faster.
  52. +1
    18 September 2023 17: 13
    Quote from Bingo
    It's not the engine's fault, so I understand it's the gearbox? But it’s also not a Newton binomial, what’s so complicated about that?

    Eat. Lack of box on T-72. There are final drives there. There is nowhere to shove the checkpoint in the MTO. That’s why you need a compact engine with a gearbox assembly, automatic or semi-automatic.
    1. +3
      18 September 2023 20: 11
      You are confused about the terms.
      On the T-64/T-72/T-80, the transmission includes, in particular, SIDE TRANSMISSIONS and FINAL TRANSMISSIONS.
  53. -1
    18 September 2023 17: 26
    Quote from Alexandre
    Why not buy a license to produce diesel from the French or Germans in times of boundless love between us?


    I don't think they would have sold it. They played for time, received an advance payment and would not have sold.
  54. -1
    18 September 2023 18: 39
    degradation of the Kharkov school of tank and engine building
    ***********

    It would be funny if it weren't so sad. Author, have you seen the stronghold? They are no worse than the T-90m, and in many ways they are superior.
    1. 0
      18 September 2023 20: 33
      Schools have degraded equally, but industries have degraded differently.
    2. +1
      20 September 2023 10: 14
      Worse. Overweight, weak engine. And who can remember these Strongholds now? Where are they?
    3. 0
      20 September 2023 10: 15
      Worse. Overweight, weak engine. And who can remember these Strongholds now? Where are they?
  55. 0
    18 September 2023 18: 52
    This is a real breakthrough! Under Soviet rule, aliens did all this. According to the agreement - one engine, a liter of moonshine.
  56. +1
    18 September 2023 20: 30
    Where can you use 2v-12:
    - bulldozers;
    - drilling rigs;
    - recycling equipment;
    - diesel power plants;
    - small ships...
    There is enough here even without Kirovets.
    We don't have a 1000 hp diesel engine.
    1. 0
      18 September 2023 20: 52
      In X-shaped engines (similar to the one planned for Armata), the crankshaft is almost two times shorter than in V-shaped engines with an equal number of cylinders, this is a significant plus, since with an increase in the length of the shaft its rigidity critically decreases, therefore 2V-12-3A can increase the number of cylinders, but in V-92S2F it is no longer possible.
      1. 0
        18 September 2023 21: 41
        He still has 6 knees (and 2B-06 too). At first we tried to do 3 knees, but the imbalance was just off the charts.
    2. 0
      18 September 2023 21: 48
      Such equipment requires a high service life, reliability, reliability and a minimum level of maintenance. The x-shaped pattern has several congenital defects that prevent this. For example, the accumulation of oil and fuel residues in the heads of the lower cylinders. This requires additional manipulation and labor. The ships are unlikely to put up with this, because... It will be necessary to check the engine at sea, etc. In addition, the crankshaft location is not very suitable for boats. Too high. It will be necessary to increase the angle of inclination of the shaft, but this is undesirable, or install an angular gearbox.
  57. The comment was deleted.
  58. -2
    18 September 2023 23: 17
    As for long-term operation at maximum power, this is good for aviation and navy, possibly for railways. Ground transport engines operate at partial loads most of the time, and in this mode gas turbine engines are less economical and less adaptable to changes in loads.

    In addition, gas turbine engines have high specific and absolute air consumption and high requirements for air purity. With a decrease in the degree of purification, the resource of the power plant is significantly reduced.

    The T80 was created for the GSVG with the expectation of using a developed road network, as well as in conditions of close proximity of enemy troops, which in turn imposed high demands on the deployment of tank units. That's all. One special ammunition arrives with Lance and there is no regiment, batteries are carried around park. So everything was done correctly.
    Any criticism of the USSR results in a paid rattle on the salary.
  59. -2
    18 September 2023 23: 52
    The T-80 was created as an MBT for all theaters of war. Only during the testing process did it become clear that it could not be such. Therefore, “suitable operating conditions” were selected for him. Arctic, etc.

    The calculation for the GSVG is something from the realm of alternative history. In Germany, the soil is such that when moving along the ground, a significant amount of fine dust is formed, which collects in the area of ​​bearings, shaft journals, etc. and works great as an abrasive.

    Therefore, in the conditions of the GSVG, the B-2 performed best. In addition to the general problems, 6TD also had a problem with the cooling system due to the chemical composition of the water and the need for appropriate treatment. For example, the slightest impurities in it led to engine overheating and failure.

    ----

    Generally speaking, the history of the Soviet tank gas turbine engine began with the fact that, not having a modern tank diesel engine, they decided to try a turbine. Moreover, there were helicopter gas turbine engines suitable in terms of power in the country. It turned out that everything was fine with the power, but with the rest there were problems. They decided to use the groundwork of aircraft manufacturers and got involved in long-term construction for years.

    The USSR was not alone in this regard. There was “jet-turbine euphoria” all over the world. They tried to use gas turbine engines on land not only here, but also in the UK and the USA. There was even an experimental bus with a gas turbine engine, and a racing car.

    However, it soon became clear that those born to fly crawl very poorly. But in the USSR there was still no real alternative to the B-2, but there was a need, the money was also spent. We decided to try it.

    The decision had both pros and cons. I have listed the disadvantages. The only positives are the power and a vague foundation for the future, and it is little consolation that the Americans also have a turbine.

    But the Americans have a different turbine, more economical, and in general the level of instrumentation is higher. Therefore, many components and units are more advanced. Plus, they don’t need MBT so badly.

    -----

    I didn't understand about the rattle.

    If you don’t know something, ask.)
    1. -2
      19 September 2023 09: 39
      It was written about the dense network of highways in the western theater of operations, I don’t understand what the problem is with understanding or reading what was written? Tanks march along highways or country roads, and not along fields. I see cheap tricks from imports.
      1. -1
        19 September 2023 13: 02
        The circle of these revolutionaries is narrow and they are terribly far from the people. (ts)

        If you rely on a network of roads, then a tank with tracks is not needed. The caterpillar itself does not like hard surfaces. An ancient dilemma: either the mover performs well on hard surfaces or on soft soils. Therefore, no one in their right mind would design a tank with only highway use in mind.
        1. 0
          19 September 2023 16: 21
          Generally speaking, some, in an attempt to praise everything Soviet and defend against imaginary attacks, present the domestic defense industry as a bunch of idiots who spent a lot of money on creating a highway tank for the GSVG. Which is not only stupid, but also in no way connected with reality.
          1. -2
            19 September 2023 22: 25
            But it’s clear that you seem to have more serious problems. Well, here experts should already help. Tanks travel along a highway or a country road in a marching column, turning into battle formation only before an attack. And this has always been the case and it does not depend on the type of power plant. But this is an armchair analyst Unknown, they will outplay the tanks and off we go.
        2. 0
          20 September 2023 21: 45
          Quote: _KM_
          The caterpillar itself does not like hard surfaces.

          It seems that the specialists are already powerless here. On soft soils, the suspension and transmission are killed several times faster, but this is physics class somewhere around the 6th, but it seems a little difficult for you.
  60. +1
    18 September 2023 23: 57
    Quote from Kepka
    This layout scheme, by definition, cannot be non-hemorrhoidal... The late Porsche will not let you lie with its program for the dieselization of Wehrmacht tanks)))

    Of which there was no trace and in nature.
    1. -1
      19 September 2023 00: 01
      Dieselization did not happen not because of the lack of diesel, but because of the lack of diesel fuel. ) He was eaten by the fleet. The scale of the problem is indicated by the fact that the Germans actively used ships with coal boilers until the end of the war.
  61. 0
    19 September 2023 00: 00
    Quote from: ln_ln
    There are also old ideas



    [Center]

    The last one is the ship's MTU 40 H 672 7000 l. With.

    And there was also the Napier Saber.

    Place 2 pieces of 2B-06 in such a bookcase.

    I took the la off my tongue. The same Birdmoor with its design and low silhouette or the Napier and Rolls Royce K diesel engines.
  62. 0
    20 September 2023 10: 11
    What, you can’t install a turbine on 2B?
    1. 0
      20 September 2023 12: 02
      As far as I can tell it is difficult, due to the very dense layout of the engine.
    2. 0
      21 September 2023 16: 56
      There are 2 of them.
      Perhaps due to the tight layout they sacrificed the intercooler.
  63. 0
    21 September 2023 08: 56
    The development of EVERYTHING is carried out by the STATE. The release of profitable pieces is a private trader. There are no corporations (private) in the Russian Federation that both develop and produce. Development of funds is a favorite game.
  64. +1
    21 September 2023 09: 29
    Damn, these accountants are sick of me. Give them everything profitably. The Americans were not at all embarrassed that their air-cooled engines for the M47, M48, and M60 tanks were of little use for civilian equipment. The main criterion was that they provided the necessary mobility of tanks, ease of maintenance and ease of operation and repair.
  65. 0
    25 September 2023 21: 36
    Secret information, future wars will be in this style: the main thing is not the armor, but the intensity of the fighting, i.e. copters with machine guns and anti-tank missiles, in a certain area there are 10000 soldiers, 30-40 thousand copters are produced and mow down the front, tanks and reinforcements can’t keep up with the intensity, minefields are useless, art and firepower are useless if the copters are close and right at the positions of the firing points , which will cause discord in the ranks. The speed of inexpensive systems and close combat operations. The main criterion will be just protecting the copters from small things, that’s all. Even aviation will not be able to mow down such numerous systems.
  66. The comment was deleted.
  67. -1
    25 October 2023 14: 32
    There will be no Armata and, accordingly, no engine for it. The current state is not capable of developing and mastering the production of such complex equipment, at most modernization. this is the ceiling. Look at the Minister of Industry, by the way, he was one of the first to fly on his jet from Russia during the march of Prigozhin’s PMC to Moscow.
  68. -1
    22 November 2023 20: 00
    Different tanks are needed for offense and defense. For peacetime and for wartime too. Drones have radically changed everything. But you have to make do with what you have.
    PS And, just in case, we don’t have the Armata tank. And there is no engine for it either. Or rather, how... For Putin - there is. For Khuzhenetovich - yes. There is one for the parade. But they are not there for war.
  69. 0
    11 February 2024 16: 55
    Until there is a normal V diesel engine, Armata should not go into large series