Russia has resumed production of a unique engine for the T-80 tank: about its advantages

Without exaggeration, the domestic T-80 tank can be called unique. And the point here is not only that the vehicle, which was put into service almost 50 years ago (naturally, having undergone a number of modifications) is still an extremely effective weapon, as proven by the Russian special military operation.

The thing is that the T-80 is the world's first serial a tank with a gas turbine engine. This complex unit was no longer produced after the collapse of the USSR. However, SVO put everything in its place and breathed “second life” into the unique development.

Where and how power plants for T-80 tanks are being repaired today and how they have begun to be produced, “Military Acceptance” tells in its report.

We will focus on the advantages of the GTD-1000T over its predecessors - diesel engines that were installed on the T-64.

The T-80 GTD-1000T gas turbine engine has two compressors - high and low pressure, and three turbines. In general, the design of the unit turned out to be very simple in appearance, but expensive to implement: complex castings from heat-resistant steel were needed, the production of which was carried out by several enterprises in the USSR.

At the same time, the new engine fully met expectations.

So, not only was the GTD-1000T almost one and a half times lighter and much smaller than the T-64 diesel unit, but it also did not require a liquid cooling system or heating in winter.

In addition, the T-80 gained acceleration faster, and its speed on the march (70 km/h) was almost 10% higher than that of the T-64 (65 km/h on the highway).

But that’s not all, the GTD-1000T did not require preheating. Thus, T-80 tanks started up much faster, especially in winter.

The unique braking system also deserves special attention. Indeed, the T-80 was the first to use a combined mode that simultaneously used mechanical brakes and the engine turbine (an adjustable turbine nozzle allows you to change the direction of gas flows to force the turbine blades to rotate in the opposite direction).

An important advantage of the gas turbine power plant is its multi-fuel capability. The unit can operate on jet aviation TS-1 and TS-2, diesel fuel and low-octane automobile gasolines.

Finally, the T-80, thanks to the latest power plant, created much less noise and had a smooth ride. In this regard, the driver-mechanics easily controlled it and were less tired on the march.

Comments

[Real Pilot]

Wonderful engine.
And it can be used not only on tanks!
As a power plant for high-speed boats, for example. With some minor modifications.

[Silver99]

Just yesterday there was a report about this unique engine, gas turbine engines are also found on the Abrams, but that is an aircraft helicopter engine, and this is a purely tank development. an American simply gets up after dust, his filters become clogged, the engine from the T-80, due to two independent impellers rotating synchronously, digests all the dust, then its ability, due to the adjustable air flow, from maximum thrust to a complete stop in less than a second, this allows the engine not to stall during bumping into an obstacle. The T-80 engine is the same size without losing power by three times!!! smaller than the American one, this allows you to take on board more fuel and ammunition, due to a better layout.

[Alekseev]

Dear Silver, everyone has a television, but how many years have you served on the T-80 to describe so colorfully how the gas turbine engine “digests all the dust”?
And it’s also funny about the “impellers rotating synchronously”...
I had to operate the T-80BV for a couple of years, and before it the T-64, 62,55, i.e. tanks with a diesel power plant.
In order not to repeat what has already been repeated many times, I will say that the gas turbine engine has both advantages and disadvantages.
The main disadvantage is gluttony, price and poor maintainability. Don't believe the nonsense about "multi-fuel". Kerosene or, as a substitute, good diesel fuel.
Advantages? Quick to change if you have what it takes, plenty of power, a flat torque curve and the ability to start in winter without heating.
But, you should also remember that this unit starts up according to the program, in winter and in summer within, God forbid, 1 minute 20 seconds. Not like a diesel engine instantly (at oil and coolant temperatures above zero). It may be objected that the Kharkov 5TDF sometimes requires heating in the summer, but this is a special case in an internal combustion engine .
So, the tank needs to urgently change position, but here you wait for more than a minute...
On the other hand, diesel must in this case always be kept at a temperature above zero degrees.
Like this. Pros and cons, as in VO.
Taken together, GBTU specialists concluded that gas turbine engines are more acceptable in the sky.
Why release new ones?
Despite the existing shortcomings, which are tolerable with proper operation, not using thousands of eighties from storage during the war would be a crime.
How not to do major repairs to them. But overhauling a tank differs from making a new one only in that the old armored hull is used, but components, assemblies, and systems are replaced with new or restored ones.

[Sergey T19]

In addition to the price, this engine is very power hungry.

[Jager]

Fortunately, we can afford it. At least there is plenty of oil in Russia. They’ll find it for the war, but somehow we’ll manage to get through a liter of 95 for 70 rubles, yes...

[Escariot]

Quote: Jager

Fortunately, we can afford it. At least there is plenty of oil in Russia. They’ll find it for the war, but somehow we’ll manage to get through a liter of 95 for 70 rubles, yes...

All that remains is to take it to the front line and refuel the tank.

[ramzay21]

Fortunately, we can afford it. At least there is plenty of oil in Russia.

The USSR could afford this, because ALL oil belonged to the state. And now they buy fuel and lubricants at full price plus kickbacks to ghouls in stripes, and in the end I wouldn’t be surprised if the Moscow Region buys diesel fuel for 150 rubles per liter plus delivery.
Then this fuel must somehow be delivered to the front line under fire, and here the issue of efficiency becomes very important.

[Witsapiens]

The USSR could afford this, because ALL oil belonged to the state

But in the USA, oil does not belong to the state, and they can afford Abrams with a gas turbine engine. A task, right?

And so, the USSR could afford anything, because the Soviet state, without looking, threw money into the military-industrial complex while the population stood in line for toilet paper.

[Letun]

Quote from Witsapiens

But in the USA, oil does not belong to the state, and they can afford Abrams with a gas turbine engine. A task, right?

To equalize the financial capabilities of the United States and the Russian Federation, you need to know that the GDP of the state of Texas alone is greater than the GDP of all of Russia.
Bad luck, right?

[ramzay21]

But in the USA, oil does not belong to the state, and they can afford Abrams with a gas turbine engine. A task, right?

In the USA, there are no cases of fuel being sold at a higher price than at army gas stations, but we have plenty of such facts. And of course, the Russian military budget is 10 times less than the American one. It's like buying and maintaining a new Mercedes like a neighbor who earns 10 times more. Of course you can buy it, but what will happen to the rest of the expenses in your family? Task yes?

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

The USSR could afford this, because ALL oil belonged to the state. And now they buy fuel and lubricants at full price plus kickbacks to ghouls in stripes, and in the end I wouldn’t be surprised if the Moscow Region buys diesel fuel for 150 rubles per liter plus delivery.

Oil, like all other resources, still belongs to the state; private companies buy them from the state at auction to begin their development.

Yes, in the USSR everything was state-owned, but the attitude towards everything was like on a collective farm, with vyrvar inefficient production and low quality fuel.

[ramzay21]

Yes, in the USSR everything was state-owned, but the attitude towards everything was like on a collective farm, with vyrvar inefficient production and low quality fuel.

And therefore, for 30 years, the Russian Federation has not produced any new tanks, guns, MLRS, aircraft, small arms or communications equipment. And even such an advanced country as Iran can produce all types of UAVs, but the Russian Federation cannot. Although the USSR was one of the first to launch the production of UAVs on stream and produced about a thousand jet UAVs.

[Aaron Zawi]

For the army, it is best if the matter is limited to the engine. The T-90M is a wonderful machine and the military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation, logically, should proceed to the production of only this MBT. In general, the presence of several aircraft models always worsens logistics. This is a truism.

[svp67]

Quote: Aron Zaavi

The T-90M is a wonderful machine and the military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation, logically, should proceed to the production of only this MBT. In general, the presence of several aircraft models always worsens logistics. This is a truism.

Everything is correct, except for one thing, the engine of the V-2 family, which is now used on Tagil tanks, has reached the limit of its modernization capabilities, and the maximum they produce is about 1200 hp.
This is where the advantage of gas turbine engines manifests itself; there are already prototypes producing 1400, and in the future 1600 and 2000 hp.
Of course, you can install a 90-B-2 series engine from the T-2 on the T-14, but this means completely redoing the rear part of the tank.
What I agree with is that the turret and fighting compartment of tanks now need to be unified and made SINGLE for the T-72/90 and T-80 family tanks. Moreover, it was developed a long time ago and passed the test cycle, under the symbol "Burlak"
Here it is installed on the T-80 tank

[Alekseev]

Of course, it needs to be redone. How difficult and expensive is this? Here we need to count specifically. After all, they installed the progenitor 80B-2 on the experimental 12 forty years ago, and even with 16 “pots”, and therefore larger in size.
And the Uzbeks are exchanging the 64 5TDFs they inherited from the union for B-84s. It’s also not entirely simple, but we found a way.

[Romario_Argo]

and it is also urgently needed,
to work out options for equipping the tower roof and hatches for the built-in and in some places spaced apart DZ Relikt,
well, or at least add the same amount to the tower of the spaced DZ Relikt, covering the hatches of the commander and gunners

[Disant]

svp67 (Sergey)
This is where the advantage of gas turbine engines manifests itself; there are already prototypes producing 1400, and in the future 1600 and 2000 hp.

So this will lead to an increase in size, won't it?

What I agree with is that the turret and fighting compartment of tanks now need to be unified and made SINGLE for the T-72/90 and T-80 family tanks. Moreover, it was developed a long time ago and passed the test cycle, under the symbol "Burlak"

a barge hauler with a turret-mounted niche for a b\c in any design is a tasty target for everyone.
Tankers on T-90s write from the fields that they don’t put tanks there, and they don’t put tanks in niches or racks either. only into the automatic loader - under your feet.
and a removable container with b\k and AZ - you still get out of the battle when reloading, right? again it requires a charging machine...
too hard

[Nikolaevich I]

Quote: Aron Zaavi

In general, the presence of several aircraft models always worsens logistics. This is a truism.

It is assumed that there is still a “battle for the Arctic” ahead... And for this region, the gas turbine engine is the “ideal” engine! So...to God is God's, and to Caesar what is Caesar's!

[Captain Pushkin]

In Soviet times, a gas turbine engine for the T-80 was more expensive than the T-72 tank.

[Yrec]

The biggest disadvantage of the gas turbine engine is its price. It is dozens of times higher than the B-92 from the T-72/90! The B-2 family of diesel engines, to which the B-92 belongs, is produced in tens of thousands per year and is used on shunting diesel locomotives, tugs, boats, heavy vehicles, etc. (at least during the Soviet era). GTD cannot boast of this. As practice shows, a tank must be cheap and technologically advanced.

[Jager]

I wonder where the B-2 (modifications) are now used in new technology? Certainly not in diesel locomotives.

[svp67]

Quote: Yrec

It is dozens of times higher than the B-92 from the T-72/90!

No, that's no longer the case. The B-92 engine is far from cheap, and what’s more, it’s overloaded, which means it’s still problematic to survive from it now

[vovochkarzhevsky]

The T-80 GTD-1000T gas turbine engine has two compressors - high and low pressure, and three turbines.

What kind of nonsense is this? This engine has a two-stage centrifugal compressor, a two-stage axial-flow compressor turbine and a single-stage axial-flow free turbine.
The level of the site has sunk to the level of grandma's gatherings on a bench.

[vik669]

Why be surprised! Chukchi is not a reader, Chukchi is a writer

[shikin]

So the article also talks about reversing the rotation of the turbine due to the reversal of the nozzle :) But the fact that there is a gas turbine engine turbine and a separate power turbine is unknown to the author.

[ln_ln]

Correctly written. 2 turbochargers: low pressure (TK-I) and high pressure (TK-II with a hollow shaft through which the TK-I shaft passes). And a power (free) turbine.

There is plenty of nonsense in the article, but not this one.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

Correctly written. 2 turbochargers: low pressure (TK-I) and high pressure (TK-II with a hollow shaft through which the TK-I shaft passes). And a power (free) turbine.

There is plenty of nonsense in the article, but not this one.

Well, well, indicate it on the engine drawing.

[Barmaglot_07]

In fact, the first tank with a gas turbine engine was the Swedish Strv 103, ten years before the T-80.

[Jager]

It was a “crutch” in the form of a twin-engine unit, diesel + gas turbine engine. The T-80 had the first purely tank gas turbine engine.
The same applies to the T-34. V-2 is the first production tank diesel engine. Before him, the same Japanese installed diesel engines. But those were car or tractor engines.

[Setavr]

On the gas turbine engine line, it was auxiliary, cut to help a regular diesel engine under difficult road conditions.

[ln_ln]

Wow, “auxiliary”, twice as powerful as a diesel!
Another thing is that this not very successful breakdown of power led to too frequent startup of the gas turbine engine.

[Prisoner]

If we remember for whom the T-80 theater of war was built with their gas turbine engines and add one plus one, then “civilian” Europeans should destroy the highways just in case.

[Escariot]

Quote: Captive

If we remember for whom the T-80 theater of war was built with their gas turbine engines and add one plus one, then “civilian” Europeans should destroy the highways just in case.

For what? The USSR barely had enough fuel tankers to provide the GSVG in the event of a major war. Russia did not have enough fuel tankers to provide logistics for the T-72 from the border to Boryspil. And here are some wet dreams about autobahns and a T-80 that eats fuel like crazy.

[Revolver]

Quote from Escariot

And here are some wet dreams about autobahns and a T-80 that eats fuel like crazy.

Refueling on the highways from local resources is quite an idea. True, the Germans will be indignant that all sorts of people come here to the gas station without a queue.

[Escariot]

Quote: Nagan

Quote from Escariot

And here are some wet dreams about autobahns and a T-80 that eats fuel like crazy.

Refueling on the highways from local resources is quite an idea. True, the Germans will be indignant that all sorts of people come here to the gas station without a queue.

It was not possible to refuel at Ukrainian gas stations, do you think it will be possible at German ones?

[ln_ln]

According to A.K. Dzyavgo, the head of the pipeline troops said that they would tighten the pipes for the tankers.

[Venara]

Disadvantage: high cost and gluttony. I can’t say anything about multi-fuel, but the removal of paraffin fractions from vehicles and diesel fuel is not comparable. Perhaps some special grades of diesel fuel? Equipment using gas turbine engines as power plants had problems with diesel fuel filtration, and performance directly depended on the quality of the fuel. In addition, the mileage of an object at the same gas station is directly proportional to the experience of the driver. According to various estimates, from 200 to 300 km. However, there are significant advantages for combat operations, despite the cost and gluttony..

[ln_ln]

The GTD-1250 has diesel as its main fuel. The same goes for GTA-18.

[svp67]

So, not only was the GTD-1000T almost one and a half times lighter and much smaller than the T-64 diesel unit,

I'm just shocked... How much STUPIDITY can you write... Who are they aimed at?
We take the “Technical descriptions” of both engines and compare:
Engine dimensions (mm)
Length GTD1000T-1495 5TDF-1413
Width GTD1000T-1042 5TDF-955
Height GTD1000T-932 5TDF-580
So which engine is BIGGER?
Now the masses of “dry” engines, in kg...
GTD1000T-1050 5TDF-1020

[Bad_gr]

Quote: svp67

We take the “Technical descriptions” of both engines and compare:

The dimensions of the 5TDF diesel engine are given with a cooling system?

[svp67]

Quote: Bad_gr

The dimensions of the 5TDF diesel engine are given with a cooling system?

No engine itself...no systems, like the GTD-1000T

[75 Sergey]

So it’s not on the gas turbine engine - it’s not provided for! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The chubby ones love to be disingenuous.
As in the joke - a cool watch, and two suitcases - batteries for it.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: Bad_gr

The dimensions of the 5TDF diesel engine are given with a cooling system?

Quote: svp67

No engine itself...no systems, like the GTD-1000T

It would probably be more correct to compare the sizes of the MTO itself.
T-64 -------------- 2,6 m³
T-80 -------------- 2,8 m³ (3140 kg)
T-72 -------------- 3,1 m³
"Abrams" ------ 6,8 m³ (7610 kg)
"Leopard-2" --- 6,9 m³ (7730 kg)

The numbers vary slightly in different sources of information. For example, according to the MTO of the T-80 tank, 2,5 m³ is found, and for the T-64 --- 2,4 m³. Maybe different modifications, or an error.

[forty-eighth]

Where is Armata?
____________________

[Foma Kinyaev]

“We started producing” - you don’t have to read any further... All that effective managers are capable of is patching up the T-80 from storage, the USSR made galoshes. In the USSR they managed somehow without slogans about the future start of production, they just produced and that’s it.

[Escariot]

Quote: Foma Kinyaev

“We started producing” - you don’t have to read any further... All that effective managers are capable of is patching up the T-80 from storage, the USSR made galoshes. In the USSR they managed somehow without slogans about the future start of production, they just produced and that’s it.

The USSR also managed without cell phones, holidays for citizens in Turkey and peach-scented toilet paper. All efforts were aimed at producing the expensive T-80. Moreover, even in the USSR, the managers of that time realized that producing and operating a T-80 with a gas turbine engine was very expensive and began the transition to the T-80UD with a 6TD as a power plant.

[ln_ln]

There was no “transition”; Omsk and Kharkov made T-80U and T-80UD in parallel. There was an attempt to launch production of gas turbine engines in Kharkov, but this was abandoned in time. One plant in Kaluga is enough; crushing will only increase the price.

[Witsapiens]

Modern, effective management is better than poor Soviet management. While people stood in line for toilet paper, the USSR was throwing money at the military-industrial complex.

By the way, about the slogans, when was communism supposed to arrive there?

[Voenoboz]

Communism existed only they didn’t announce it to us like this.

[Byurer]

“...An important advantage of a gas turbine power plant is its multi-fuel capability...” As if the V-92, 5TD and even UTD families were not multi-fuel

[ln_ln]

The versatility of a diesel engine with an undivided combustion chamber is quite conditional. Suffice it to recall the UTD-20, for which the chief designer Egorov did not allow the work to be recorded on gasoline.
The real multi-fuel engine is the pre-chamber MTU 873 on the Leo-2.
In 1945, our tank crews added oil to German gasoline to reduce the delay in self-ignition and lubricate parts of fuel equipment.
True, I don’t really believe that a gas turbine engine can operate normally on gasoline, because fuel is the working fluid for all hydraulic automation, in particular, for driving the adjustable nozzle apparatus (VNA) of the power turbine. What about the vapor locks?

[Vyacheslav I.]

Quote: Yrec

The biggest disadvantage of the gas turbine engine is its price. It is dozens of times higher than the B-92 from the T-72/90! . GTD cannot boast of this. As practice shows, a tank must be cheap and technologically advanced.

But for the conditions of the far north it is ideal. That's why they resumed production.

[Escariot]

Quote: Vyacheslav I.

Quote: Yrec

The biggest disadvantage of the gas turbine engine is its price. It is dozens of times higher than the B-92 from the T-72/90! . GTD cannot boast of this. As practice shows, a tank must be cheap and technologically advanced.

But for the conditions of the far north it is ideal. That's why they resumed production.

For the far north, a maximum of a couple of hundred tanks are needed, and there should be thousands of old T-80s in warehouses. Of course, it wouldn’t be a bad idea to update and modernize them, but building an entire tank production line for such a small number is the height of wastefulness.

[ln_ln]

So there is no need to build anything. A slight modernization of production in Kaluga will only reduce the price.

[75 Sergey]

One massive arrival and what to do?!

[Havoc]

Quote: Vyacheslav I.

Quote: Yrec

The biggest disadvantage of the gas turbine engine is its price. It is dozens of times higher than the B-92 from the T-72/90! . GTD cannot boast of this. As practice shows, a tank must be cheap and technologically advanced.

But for the conditions of the far north it is ideal. That's why they resumed production.

Have you heard anything about pre-heaters for diesel engines, they work autonomously, and modern diesel fuel itself now has a high freezing point, so the starting problem is far-fetched, I’m telling you this as a resident of the Arctic, and we don’t have such winters anymore harsh.

[Alexga]

And now in more detail.

In addition, the T-80 gained acceleration faster, and its speed on the march (70 km/h) was almost 10% higher than that of the T-64 (65 km/h on the highway).

Yes, the T-80 is faster, but the movement of tanks on the march is no more than 40 km. per hour, and then for a couple of hours, then the driver mechanics need to be sent on vacation. So speed is not the main thing. A single vehicle can work quickly, but for a platoon it is no longer possible.

GTD-1000T did not require preheating. Thus, T-80 tanks started up much faster, especially in winter.

Only in winter and only if the diesel engine needs to be heated. And then the gas turbine engine needs to be driven for almost a minute to start, but a diesel engine needs 5, maximum 10 seconds. So count how much time will pass from the command “Start” to the command “Forward”. In addition, starting the gas turbine engine is only possible with a battery.

An important advantage of the gas turbine power plant is its multi-fuel capability. The unit can operate on jet aviation TS-1 and TS-2, diesel fuel and low-octane automobile gasoline.

What happens with a gas turbine engine on diesel fuel and gasoline, and with a diesel engine on a vehicle and gasoline can hardly be called operation. The loss of engine power is terrible.

[ln_ln]

"In addition, starting a gas turbine engine is only possible with a battery."
On the T-80U, the auxiliary power unit GTA-18 is started from one 12ST-85 battery, and from four - even in a fairly discharged state, and the main engine is started from the GTA-18.
They also wanted to modernize the T-80BV with the installation of GTA-18.

[nerovnayadoroga]

How fast you all are, in -20 frost it will take a long or very long time to start a diesel engine, start the heater for about 10 minutes with good batteries, warm up the cooling system to the starting temperature for about 30-40 minutes, warm up the oil, pump the oil, creating pressure in the oil system, heat it up fuel filters, pump the fuel, a total of an hour and an hour and a half if the batteries are normal and there is high pressure air! Go ahead on the broom, you can warm it up with your hands, you can use it with your ass, and if the fuel turns out to be summer fuel, then you won’t be able to start it until summer, ahead with a song, experts...

[Amateur]

Production resumed in Russia

There is not a single word in the article that engine production has been resumed, just as there is no information about where, when and how much.

[Bad_gr]

Quote: Amateur

Production resumed in Russia

There is not a single word in the article that engine production has been resumed, just as there is no information about where, when and how much.

Have you watched the video?

[bone1]

They increased the power by 10%, and to be honest, why would a tank need this, it’s not a racing car?

[Chief Officer Lom]

They haven't resumed, but are renewing. Not a single new engine has yet been released according to this transfer, although I am very glad that the readiness for a successful resumption of production is high and work continues successfully, and not just optimistic statements where the horse was not lying. As always, the parent enterprise is faced with the fact that other enterprises that once supplied it with important components no longer exist, and they have to organize the production of these, often quite complex units, at home.
PS
Regarding low noise, the statement is interesting. I met with this tank several times, and I got the impression that from the front it is really almost silent, but from the back the sound of a jet aircraft is very impressive. Perhaps the impression was wrong?

[2112vda]

Quote: Alekseev

Not like diesel instantly

And you don't turn on the oil pump before starting? Well, why mislead people? Yes, you can start “instantly” on a diesel engine if it is idling. We had “specialists” who started the D-12 without turning on the oil pump, but it really ended badly for the engine. Based on the GTD-1000, an excellent engine for An-2 type aircraft can be obtained. Indeed, the engine is expensive, but it has a service life of 25000 hours before overhaul, and not 2500 as on advanced aircraft pistons. The miser pays many times over. Calculate the number of major repairs of a piston engine and their cost and compare with the cost of the GTD-1000. Then there will be something to talk about.

[km-21]

When we criticize Abrams with gas turbine engines, we note such shortcomings as gluttony, dust vulnerability and high visibility in the infrared range. However, when it comes to our gas turbine T-80s, for some reason we forget about all these shortcomings.

[AG-76]

Again, scattering of funds instead of unification.
Even for the mighty USSR three! main battle tanks were an expensive pleasure (T-64, T-72, T-80). And they considered the issue of abandoning some, commissions were created, but each design bureau and the plant associated with it had its own lobby at the top, so everything remained so, they continued to squander funds on the production of three tanks....
Not a single richest country in the world can afford this.
Now again the same rake: T-72, T-80, T-90.
And if the T-72 and T-90 are at least the same type of tanks, with many interchangeable components, the T-80 is a completely different machine. Moreover, it’s expensive because of that same gas turbine engine.
Those. In addition to the production burden on the budget of different types of tanks, there is also a burden on military logistics - supplying and repairing different types of equipment.
And the fact that the T-80 starts very easily and quickly in winter does not stand up to criticism.
Apart from the T-80, almost all military equipment is equipped with diesel engines.
Tanks do not fight on their own; they are accompanied by self-propelled guns, infantry in armored personnel carriers/infantry fighting vehicles, air defense systems, engineer vehicles, etc. Those. in any case, the tanks will not rush on the offensive, on the march, until the rest are ready. And in this case, what does the quick start of the T-80 gas turbine engine matter if the rest of the equipment is diesel anyway?
The equipment should be unified, concentrated on one type of tank, one type of self-propelled guns, MLRS, etc.
It is clear that the North Military District is now underway, and everything that can fight is going into battle. That's why they pulled everything out.
But the question of unification was, is and will be, because It's a matter of spending taxpayers' money wisely.
But if the Ministry of Defense is not interested in this, but is only interested in cutting and rollback schemes, then that’s a different question...

[RuAbel]

A captivating article))) Everyone who has touched on engine use in any way knows that a turbine in general is an extremely delicate unit and requires compliance with thermal operating conditions, air purity, and regular replacement. Unfortunately, none of these conditions can be met in war. Therefore, let's leave gas turbine tanks for biathlons, and for war we will rivet good old diesel engines and provide them with cheap fuel.

[Eug]

Two big disadvantages are fuel consumption, very high air consumption and air purification requirements.

[Mikhail3]

I had an acquaintance who was a mechanic-driver of a T-80; according to his story, he was one of the “elite” mechanic drivers in the command in the GDR. That is, he showed different tricks in front of delegations, helped out units during maneuvers, etc.
In general, from the point of view of mechanics, this engine simply has a huge advantage in maintainability. Whatever fails in it, within a few seconds it leads to breakage of the blades. Either just the compressor, or all turbines in general. And as soon as the engine “spits out” (the blades fly into the nozzles), it needs to be removed entirely from the engine compartment, packed, and off to the factory. It does not provide for any field repairs)
Which cannot but please the repairmen, who don’t bother with it, trying to reanimate the dead. Whether this state of affairs is good or bad - the battle will show...

[wladimirjankov]

Russia resumed production of a unique engine for the T-80 tank

Which plant specifically restarted? When? No facts. Looks like another far-fetched story. It's not so easy to resume. It is easy to stop, close and take apart production. Now there are probably no assembly lines or suppliers of components for a long time. It took us 96 years, or even more, to resume production of the old IL-15.