Production of gas turbine engines GTD-1250 for T-80 tanks has been resumed in Kaluga

Russia resumed production of gas turbine engines for tanks T-80, production launched in Kaluga at PJSC CADVI. Several Russian resources report this at once.

The Kaluga plant has resumed production of 1250-horsepower gas turbine engines GTD-1250 for the T-80 tank. The production of engines began against the backdrop of an increase in the pace of modernization of various modifications of T-80 tanks removed from storage, bringing them to the T-80BVM version, which has shown its effectiveness in the special operation zone. In addition, preparations are being made to resume production of these tanks at the facilities of Uralvagonzavod.

According to available data, large-scale production of 1250-horsepower gas turbine engines GTD-1250 has been launched with the possibility of bringing them to the level of modifications of the GTD-1400; it is also planned to produce the more powerful GTD-1500 engine, developed back in the USSR, but not put into production due to the collapse of the country .

Today, Russian enterprises do not produce new T-80 tanks; modernization and overhaul of those previously produced at the Omsk Transport Engineering Plant are underway. This tank was produced from 1979 to 1991, during which time more than 10 thousand T-80 tanks of various modifications were produced. The reactivation of tanks and their reduction to the modern version began in 2016, but in small batches. After the start of the SVO, the pace increased, and later a decision was made to resume production of T-80 tanks. Today, military-industrial complex enterprises are preparing capacities for the start of production of the tank.

Comments

[RusGr]

Well, otherwise everyone was screaming, we can’t do anything! By the way, the Carver walk-behind tractor is assembled at the same plant, plows well, no complaints! On a gas turbine engine, you can silently drive up 100-70 meters to the enemy and release the entire drum. That's the beauty of it!

[Ross xnumx]

Quote: RusGr

Well, otherwise everyone was screaming, we can’t do anything!

You know, young man! I'm tired of your slogans from manuals and claqueurism!
For the depth of your superficial thinking, you would define the difference between “we can’t do anything” and “we are still using the developments of the USSR.”
* * *
New developments - concepts of Soviet science, which at that time did not have materials with the required characteristics, mastered taking into account the achievements over 32 years... I’ll tell you more, back in the late 80s and early 90s, a video cassette recorder was a luxury, but today no one can be surprised even by a sophisticated smartphone...
After a quarter of a century of rule, it was time to show whose interests are more important for the country. And the expansion of production in the defense industry is an excellent indicator that the cart has started moving.
* * *
Maybe they will make an adjustment to the caliber of the gun, although the answer lies with the specialists...
* * *
Yes, what about the new An-2? How are the work on creating ekranoplanes going? What's new with VNEU?
What answer have the Americans prepared for the creation of an MLRS complex with the performance characteristics of short- and medium-range OTRK? At what stage is the creation of the A-30? What about the May decrees, the development concept until 2022 and 25 high-tech jobs?
From what year can we expect population growth in Russia? Maybe I should have asked Putin this question, he doesn’t know that throughout the world the excess income tax fluctuates at the level of 30-55%...
* * *
It’s stupid to minus - to take away something that doesn’t exist...

[anatolv]

Interesting to hear about your contribution to population growth in Russia!

[Bad_gr]

Quote: ROSS 42

What about the May decrees, the development concept until 2022 and 25 high-tech jobs?

https://youtu.be/HEFbHN_LkMU?t=26

[neworange88]

The news is encouraging.

The regional publication “Kaluga Provincial News” back in September of this year reported on the beginning of the PJSC’s preparations for the production of engines for the T-80:
Today, the state has set the task of creating an even more powerful gas turbine engine (1500 horsepower instead of the current 1250). Work in this direction has already begun.

Kaluga residents promise to put the GTD-1500 on the assembly line by 2025, and this is simply wonderful. Our country will then receive a full cycle of production of “jet” tanks, ideal for operation in the extreme conditions of the Arctic, and also as a means of rapid deep breakthrough.

https://topcor.ru/42294-novomu-t-80-byt-v-kaluge-nachnetsja-proizvodstvo-reaktivnogo-dvigatelja-gtd-1500.html

It was based on the experience of the SVO and the demonstrated qualities of the T-80BVM with GTD-1250 in mobility over the same T-90M that the Russian Defense Ministry set the task of preparing the production of a new modification of the T-80 with reinforced armor and propulsion GTD-1500. GTD-1500 was successfully tested on training ground during the Soviet Union on the Black Eagle tank being developed. So news is a plus. In addition, the GTD-1500 engine has a powerful filter against dust and dirt, so the GTD-1500 is not afraid of dust, unlike the gas turbine engine on the Abrams, which requires constant care and maintenance.
The video below shows filters from the GTD-1500. The GTD-1500 can digest 100 kg of dust every 100 hours. They talk about this in the video starting from the 8th minute.

“We tested a tank with a GTD-1500 outside the city on the Volkhonskoye Highway. To avoid problems with the traffic police, these works were carried out very early in the morning. So, The tank reached speeds of up to 95 km/h. The car was very obedient and easy to drive", - said Efremov. This machine had very great potential, but due to the crisis, the 1500-horsepower power unit could not be introduced into mass production. According to Efremov, They wanted to equip the Nizhny Tagil tank Object 187, which was created in the early 90s, with this powerful turbine. The designers even installed the GTD-1500 on one of the prototypes.

https://topwar.ru/64887-gazoturbinnye-dvigateli-razgonyali-rossiyskie-tanki-do-100-km-ch.html

[Cympak]

UVZ may start assembling the T-80, but it will be a different tank. The casting of the turrets has been lost, therefore the turret will be welded, like the T-90M, therefore, instead of the loading mechanism there will be an automatic loader and as a result the shelf will be something between the T-80 (hull and engine) and the T-90 (turret)

[Etoya]

As I said, I will have a more powerful engine, fortunately modern materials make this quite easy to do, switching to composite blades will help a lot. All the same, the USSR was on the right path - tanks should be mobile, but the T90 turned out to be a dead-end branch of development. GTD-1500 will allow you to reach 100 km along the highway, but the main thing is that it will allow you to gain speed faster. The problem is in the gearbox, another reverse gear is badly needed

[Carib]

We need different tanks for different theaters and applications. The T-90 and its followers have their own tasks, ambushes, defense, South. For the T-80 of the north, active defense, marches, envelopments, sneaking. The military knows better. And two independent manufacturers allow us to quickly saturate and compete, each introducing its own new products and know-how.

[unhappy]

As always, the concept of a universal weapon is flawed. It's like a fighter-bomber, and the fighter is so-so and the bomber is lousy. The MBT is the main battle tank; it turns out to be a tank with weak armor and mediocre dynamics. And at the front, for various tasks, both tanks with powerful protection and tanks for “attacks” like the T-80 BVM are needed (but not with cardboard armor like the French on wheels).

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

The T-80 seemed to be produced and repaired in Omsk... Why drag everything to Joburg,

Not to Yekaterinburg, but to Nizhny Tagil.

[Carib]

The T-80 seems to have been produced and repaired in Omsk... Why drag everything to Joburg, it seems they have already started producing Kaolitsiya and other self-propelled guns...?
Regarding the Kaluga plant, it’s really nice to hear. The father-in-law took part in the establishment of production, in running tests at testing sites from the first engines. Kaluga from Perm attracted engine engineers.

[Alexander Salenko]

There are enough pests of our own to keep the coalition from leaving. This order will overload the plant, and it will not be able to produce other equipment. You don't even have to be an investigator here.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Carib

The T-80 seems to have been produced and repaired in Omsk... Why drag everything to Joburg, it seems they have already started producing Kaolitsiya and other self-propelled guns...?

Where in the article is it written about Yekaterinburg? There is only a mention of UVZ:

In addition, preparations are being made to resume production of these tanks at the facilities of Uralvagonzavod.

So, “Omsk Transport Engineering Plant” (formerly KBTM) is also UVZ.

99,9 percent of the authorized capital of KBTM is owned by NPK Uralvagonzavod.

[Kote Pan Kokhanka]

Like the Ural Heavy Engineering Plant in Yekaterinburg, where self-propelled guns are repaired.

[ism_ek]

Quote: Kote pane Kohanka

Ural Heavy Engineering Plant

Uralmash and Uraltransmash are different enterprises.

[75 Sergey]

Why won’t the Omsk Tank Building Plant produce the T-80?
It’s probably easier for Uralvagonzavod to install a gas turbine engine in its T-72 and its modifications?

[Siberia55]

Because there is no capacity. The plant was stolen all over the city in 90-00. I myself worked at an enterprise not related to the defense industry on machines from this plant. With the start of the Northern Military District, the plant was slightly revived.

[75 Sergey]

And now, who did this to the plant? They were orphans and died; it won’t be possible to confiscate the loot and imprison someone?

[Siberia55]

Some have already died of old age. The question is different: well, you’ll find it, put it in jail, confiscate it and shoot it, but the plant won’t make money from it.

[VladMirU]

Never mind. "A thief should sit in jail."

[75 Sergey]

So other gays will be an example and will be afraid to drag and show off their loot.
https://www.compromat.ru/page_44769.htm

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Siberia55

Because there is no capacity. The plant was stolen all over the city in 90-00. I myself worked at an enterprise not related to the defense industry on machines from this plant. With the start of the Northern Military District, the plant was slightly revived.

OJSC Omsktransmash (part of the Uralvagonzavod corporation) completed the 2014 defense order ahead of schedule for the overhaul and modernization of T-72 B3 tanks coming from the troops, TASS reports with reference to the press service of the enterprise.
As part of the state order, the repair of the T-80 tanks was also completed. The repair was carried out under a contract with the SPC Uralvagonzavod.

© VO. The Omsk plant completed the state order for the modernization of T-72B3 tanks ahead of schedule. 27.11.2014.
UVZ, after purchasing KBTM and receiving a contract for the T-72B3, loaded Omsk not only with the traditional modernization of the T-80, but also with its beloved T-72s, sending part of the state order there.

Since 2013, work on modernizing T-72B tanks to the T-72B3 level began to be carried out at the Omsktransmash enterprise.

© altyn73. 10 years of the T-72B3 tank

[Siberia55]

Who bought whom is another question. Now the plant cannot produce new tanks!
All you have posted is repairs and modernization.
And letters are letters, and I was at this factory

[URAL72]

10 years of the T-72B3 tank

T-72B3 exists in THREE modifications - 2013, 2016, and 2023. Work on further improvements continues. For example, installation of an electronic warfare system

[Alexey RA]

Quote: URAL72

T-72B3 exists in THREE modifications - 2013, 2016, and 2023.

The article was written in 2014. Then there was only one modification - the basic B3
By the way, they wrote that Omsk also makes modernized B3s.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: 75Sergey

Why won’t the Omsk Tank Building Plant produce the T-80?

And who says that it won’t? OZTM was purchased by UVZ a long time ago.
I still remember this marvelous picture, when before the purchase, UVZ criticized the T-80 in every possible way and emphasized the merits of the T-72. And after the purchase, articles appeared that it was necessary to modernize not only the T-72, but also the T-80.

[Siberia55]

They stuck out the T-90
There was a fuss over the production of either the T-80 or the T-90. The fate was being decided which plant would be put into operation: Nizhny Tagil or Omsk. The decision was made under Yeltsin, and where is he from?..
The decision was predetermined by the place of birth of our Yeltsin.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Siberia55

They stuck out the T-90

Seventeenth modification of the T-72. © Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Ground Forces, Colonel General Alexander Postnikov

Quote: Siberia55

Fate was deciding which plant would be put on hold: Nizhny Tagil or Omsk.

Nevertheless, Omsk survived, although it fell to Tagil.

[tralflot1832]

The GTD 1250 performs well in cold weather, some of the tanks will definitely go to the Leningrad Military District.

[ZhEK-Vodogrey]

The batteries run out in cold weather, and without them you can’t start the GTE 1250.

[ln_ln]

You will launch GTA-18, and with it GTD-1250.

[Slon1978]

It's nice to read news like this - when they report on what has ALREADY been done. And not like before with Rogozin at Roscosmos... and not only with him.

[RusGr]

What’s stopping you from installing the GTD-1500 in the still “excremental” Armata? Is the volume large?

[ln_ln]

On the contrary, small.
It is more difficult to place the turbine forward on the T-15.

[odometer]

Quote: RusGr

noise, drive up 100-70 meters to the enemy and release the entire drum.

Have you done your homework yet, baby? Or do you just roll everything into tanks?

[RusGr]

A woman with low social responsibility, what are you talking about?

[Enceladus]

Have you even seen the T-80? I’ve seen it more than once - it’s really very quiet... from 120-150 meters in battle you won’t hear it at all, but when there’s silence, then at 200 meters you just see that the tank is moving and that’s it, especially if the tracks haven’t started to exhaust their service life . 72/90 can be heard from miles away, especially when accelerating

Quote: curvimeter

Have you done your homework yet, baby? Or do you just roll everything into tanks?

Well, a man called AZ a drum - well, it happens

[odometer]

Stop talking nonsense... In battle (IN BATTLE) you won’t hear or see... Apparently, I saw the same thing in pictures and in toys. And more than once...

[Enceladus]

To me, IMHO, deeply from a high bell tower... live with him yourself.

[ln_ln]

The witness himself, you can’t hear it from behind the barn.

[Chief Officer Lom]

From the stern you can hear the turbine whistling, but from the front, yes, it is almost silent.

[filichkin.iura]

This is just great news, well done!

[Totor5]

Producing the T80 from scratch is, of course, nonsense; the turbines have too many shortcomings.
But during the war, to replenish the supply, it is reasonable to use all the T80s from storage.

[Ivan Ivanov]

In my opinion, we need a couple of tank factories.

[Vadim Topal Pasha]

Will you go to work there as a worker? Or just use your hands and, at most, guard? :)

[Strannik96]

Quote: ROSS 42

From what year can we expect population growth?

You need to start with yourself, and if it’s normal for yourself, explain to your children - so that they can give birth to children.

[Last centurion]

Taking into account the fact that we have large northern regions and the Finns and Japanese are also saying something, we need to have tanks (and not only tanks, but everything that rides on a tracked chassis) that will travel in any cold weather with great power on any snow. So the solution is great!

[opposite28]

But the T-62 can still serve, however, from distances and closed positions, in the absence of T-80 vehicles with a wider range of capabilities, especially for the security of the crew, which is more than obvious. But there is no way without dynamic protection. And even better, a heavy infantry fighting vehicle with very good capabilities, as was previously proposed during numerous discussions. The GTD-1400 is an ideal option, the only question is fuel consumption and the training of the crew as a whole. Maintainability in field conditions is a rhetorical question. In any case, there are all sorts of Mesedes-Benz and BMW, but the normal domestic apparatus for resolving the issue is to go to the venue for a direct reasoned dialogue with the opponent

[Totor5]

The T80BV has worse armor than the T72B, and the new T80 has better armor only on the front end (due to the new armor plate), the turret is weak, as it is cast.
It is impossible to close the rear of the turret and hull, as there is an intake and exhaust of the engine. In fact, the T80 is completely defenseless from behind and this cannot be corrected due to the design.
The T80U 1989 had a better turret than the T80BV 1985, but the T80U and UD were decommissioned and sawed up en masse in the early 2000s, so the new T80M is made from the old T80BV on a obviously weak turret.

[opposite28]

The T80BV has worse armor than the T72B, and the new T80 has better armor only on the front end (due to the new armor plate), the turret is weak, as it is cast.
It is impossible to close the rear of the turret and hull, as there is an intake and exhaust of the engine. In fact, the T80 is completely defenseless from behind and this cannot be corrected due to the design.
The T80U 1989 had a better turret than the T80BV 1985, but the T80U and UD were decommissioned and sawed up en masse in the early 2000s, so the new T80M is made from the old T80BV on a obviously weak turret.

They will strengthen it with hinged sheets + DZ, nonsense of course, but as an option))). Leopad 2A5 and M1A2 Abrams are distinguished by their low mobility in the black soil steppes of Ukraine, especially when crossing rivers through bridges and more.

[Totor5]

The sheets were welded on the T80BV in 1985. The problem is in the tower itself, which seems to be cast from Izhora. This was understood back in the 1980s, which is why they made the T80U and UD on diesel. But the Union collapsed and almost all T80U were exported, and T80UD on Kharkov diesel were written off due to the fact that Kharkov put spokes in the wheels.
Then we began to put a spoke in their wheels in the form of an export ban and patent rights to the T80, turret, gun, etc. Therefore, in Kharkov we had to make a new welded tower, and remove the stamp on everything else. And in the end it became known as the Oplot tank. But the Asians still found Soviet markings on the hulls and equipment, which indicated that the Oplots were made from Soviet T80 tanks.
In general, the T90 in electronics is the same as the T80U, only on a new welded turret, and then also with a heat pump in the 2000s.
The problem with the turbine T80 is the impossibility of armoring the rear of the turret and the rear of the hull! And you can’t put a long tower like on the T90M there either, because there is a filter with a pipe right behind the tower.
In short, there are too many shortcomings with dubious advantages over the T90.

[mz]

According to available data, large-scale production of 1250-horsepower gas turbine engines GTD-1250 has been launched with the possibility of bringing them to the level of modifications of the GTD-1400; it is also planned to produce the more powerful GTD-1500 engine, developed back in the USSR, but not put into production due to the collapse of the country .
I wonder if the existing transmission on the T-80 will withstand such a noticeable increase in power if it was originally designed for 1000 hp? Maybe someone knows?
The development and, especially, serial production of new gearboxes and other transmission units is now quite difficult.

[Totor5]

The question here is whether the brakes will hold up, because even with the old engine, the brakes come out several times more often than on the T72, because due to the weak traction at the bottom, drivers drive at the maximum thrust of the turbine, and the speed is reduced not by revs and gearbox as on the T72, but with the help brakes Roughly speaking, they press the gas and brake at the same time. If you reduce the thrust of the turbine, for example, off-road, then the turbine needs time to spin up and a shutdown occurs. Therefore, the driver does what is more convenient and ruins the brakes, and sometimes the turbine itself, which cannot be repaired at all and only needs to be replaced entirely. Which makes repairing the T80 especially fun.
Regarding good starting in cold weather... well, yes... but starting is only possible with batteries, and unfortunately, they don’t like frost. Therefore, it is advisable to store them warm.

[ln_ln]

“they press the gas and the brake at the same time” - the brake is pressed to the separator when only the adjustable nozzle apparatus (ASA) of the power turbine is working, and not the clutches T4 and T5.
Do you know that since 1986, hydraulic retarders have been installed on serial gearboxes?

Simple and cheap solutions have long been developed for weak components of serial side boxes; implementing them is not difficult.

[ln_ln]

And the T4, T5 brakes on the T-80 wear out more, because the drive has a servo cylinder, which radically reduces the force on the pedal.

[Totor5]

Again in the comments they talk about speeds... This is a war, not a race. I’m already silent about the quality of drivers in general and about the fact that at these speeds you need to steer with levers, looking through a narrow gap.
For military equipment, the main thing is reliability, and reliability in supply as well.
The T80 is a tank for a poster on a teenager's wall; for the army it is more of a burden.
Inability to armor the stern, insufficient turret armor, worse than the T72B, high fuel consumption, requiring increased supply efforts, high price of the tank and its engine - at the level of two T90s, low reliability and maintainability, when the battery is discharged - impossibility of starting from a pusher, intolerance to dust essentially puts an end to use in the southern regions of the country, low reliability of the suspension compared to the T90, low maintainability of the engine block - in the field, only a complete replacement of the engine is possible, increased wear of the brake pads due to the peculiarities of turbine control, poor engine traction at the bottom - off-road , which forces you to drive at high speeds while constantly braking.
At the same time, the tank does not have any obvious combat advantages over the T90, and that is why they tried to remove it from service back in the USSR, and then in Russia.
For the driver it is of course more convenient than the T72 series - cleaner and easier to operate, but for the country and the army it is worse.
Now there is a war and it makes sense to restore tanks from storage for the needs of the front, but making a new T80 from scratch is just like the edge of a Crime.
The emphasis should be on the T90 and T72 as the workhorses of war, and in the future - Armata. There is no need for unification, it has already shown its destructiveness even in peacetime!
The T80 should play the role that the T62/64 is now playing - a temporary solution to the war. And no more.
And all these howls about speeds approaching a hundred and a silent killer... well, this is all for posters on the wall of teenagers, and not for real work in the war.

[ln_ln]

Some of the GTD’s reproaches are fair, but in general they are nonsense, as in the orange Tagil book “The Main Battle Tank of Russia.” Application for increased funding in detailed form.

“low reliability and maintainability” - the turbine easily operates 1000 m/hours, and now this 1000 is going to be included in the warranty. Plus no oil consumption. Well, low maintainability is a complaint about the Tagil car, even the factory tester wrote about it.

“When the battery is discharged, it is impossible to start from a pusher” - but it is possible from an auxiliary power unit, and fuel consumption “for a combat day” is reduced.

“dust intolerance” - a diesel engine needs a dust transmission coefficient of no more than 0,3%, but the turbine maintains 1,5%. And the VSU (air intake device) completely solved the problem.

“low reliability of the suspension” - well, why is the Kirov suspension less reliable than the Tagil one? And why was it used on Msta-S?

“low maintainability of the engine block” - operators even transfer the gearbox with the power turbine from one engine to another.

“increased wear of brake pads” - where were the “pads” found?

“poor engine thrust at low end” - so “bad” that it cannot be turned off.

“They tried to remove it from service back in the USSR” - an attempt is not torture.

“in the future - Armata” - write off expenses as for object 140.

There has already been deunification (medium and heavy tanks). And at the next turn we will come to her again.
"Tactical" and "operational" vehicles suggest themselves. Tactical - for attacking a prepared defense. What is needed here is an artillery system of increased power (152 mm), albeit with a small amount of ammunition in the automated stacking of one burst (about 30 rounds). And tactical mobility can be provided by an accelerating-reversible turbine according to Galitsky. The operational one is a machine for developing success; the size of the ammunition load and operational mobility, and primarily the power reserve, are important here.
To simplify the development of the control system and the chassis can be the same.

[Totor5]

No need to distort
It’s as if you don’t understand what diesel traction is and why the turbine doesn’t stall.

In the Arctic, for some reason, do not launch the T80 until others have brought the batteries from the warm charging station.

As for oil and reliability... well, it’s clear that the turbine is less dirty and everyone is more comfortable because of it. But she needs expensive oils. And if something goes wrong, they will fiddle with the T72 in the field for 4 hours, and the T80 will simply be abandoned because it is not repairable... but yes, it’s easier to remove the engine, but who will remove it and where? And most importantly, do you have a second one to replace it?

Msta is not a tank and not everything is 1v1.

There is 152mm for the tank, but the barrel reliability is too low. This is not a howitzer, but a tank that always fires at full charge. And when they do, Armata is a more suitable platform for 152mm, as well as for the Coalition.

The turbine does not tolerate dust and therefore for the southern regions the kit includes a pipe like a steamship. But even with it they hit a wedge in India. And in Europe, the T80 did not reach the end of testing. But the T90 passed because the emphasis was not on advertising slogans about a quiet and fast killer and flying from a springboard. The T90 is a workhorse of war, just like the T72. But the T80 will remain a dead end and a mistake like the T64.

They wanted to film it and filmed it if a maniac had not come with a mania for the English Channel and gas stations at gas stations in Europe. After all, his plans did not include columns of fuel tankers, because there weren’t so many tanker trucks even in the USSR. Why, even the Abrams in Iraq, with their responsibility in supply, suffered grief with a turbine and lack of fuel. Even McGregor, who was the commander of the Abrams, spoke about this. And he also said that Abrams is a good tank - only it would be better if it had a diesel engine.

[ln_ln]

. It’s as if you don’t understand what diesel traction is and why the turbine doesn’t stall.

The important thing is that it does not stall if the driver makes any mistakes in a stressful situation.

. In the Arctic, for some reason, do not launch the T80 until others have brought the batteries from the warm charging station.

That’s why they installed the GTA-18 on the T-80U and were going to install it on the BV during modernization.

. It’s easier to remove the engine, but who will remove it and where?

Right in the field with a technical technician (chassis ZIL-131, I forgot the name, maybe TRM-80), I saw it myself. And on the T-72, replacing the engine takes a day, mainly due to alignment.

. Msta is not a tank and not everything is 1v1.

That is, you admit that the Kirov chassis is supported by a much more vibration-active engine.

. There is 152mm for the tank, but the barrel reliability is too low.

152 per tank is available in many versions: both smoothbore and rifled. And the low survivability is only when firing sabots with an increased charge, and this can be cured by quickly replacing the pipe, 40 years ago.

. The turbine does not tolerate dust and therefore for the southern regions the kit includes a pipe like a steamship.

Again 25. The turbine tolerates 1,5% of residual dust, if this 1,5% is given to a diesel engine, then it will not start after 200 km. The VZU does not increase the height dimensions and is installed constantly, and not only in the southern regions. The peculiarity of the aerodynamics of any tank is that while moving, dust from under the third roller is thrown onto the roof of the MTO behind the turret, and the air intake from this area must be removed anyway. Unlike Abrams, GTD-1000T/1250 centrifugal compressors do not require a contact cleaning stage.

.And in Europe the T80 did not reach the end of testing. And T90 passed

In Europe (Sweden, Greece), only the T-80U of ours participated in the tests, and it came out great, but the fact that Leo2 was chosen in both tenders is no longer a matter of technology.

. if the maniac with the Channel mania had not come

Who are you talking about?

. gas stations at gas stations in Europe

There were pipeline troops in the USSR.

[Rinat_2]

In general, you need to have one main tank, at least one hull, 2 weapons and 2 engines, everything should be interchangeable, have XNUMX factories for the production of tanks, this is too expensive

[Totor5]

Quote from: ln_ln

. It’s as if you don’t understand what diesel traction is and why the turbine doesn’t stall.

The important thing is that it does not stall if the driver makes any mistakes in a stressful situation.

. In the Arctic, for some reason, do not launch the T80 until others have brought the batteries from the warm charging station.

That’s why they installed the GTA-18 on the T-80U and were going to install it on the BV during modernization.

. It’s easier to remove the engine, but who will remove it and where?

Right in the field with a technical technician (chassis ZIL-131, I forgot the name, maybe TRM-80), I saw it myself. And on the T-72, replacing the engine takes a day, mainly due to alignment.

. Msta is not a tank and not everything is 1v1.

That is, you admit that the Kirov chassis is supported by a much more vibration-active engine.

. There is 152mm for the tank, but the barrel reliability is too low.

152 per tank is available in many versions: both smoothbore and rifled. And the low survivability is only when firing sabots with an increased charge, and this can be cured by quickly replacing the pipe, 40 years ago.

. The turbine does not tolerate dust and therefore for the southern regions the kit includes a pipe like a steamship.

Again 25. The turbine tolerates 1,5% of residual dust, if this 1,5% is given to a diesel engine, then it will not start after 200 km. The VZU does not increase the height dimensions and is installed constantly, and not only in the southern regions. The peculiarity of the aerodynamics of any tank is that while moving, dust from under the third roller is thrown onto the roof of the MTO behind the turret, and the air intake from this area must be removed anyway. Unlike Abrams, GTD-1000T/1250 centrifugal compressors do not require a contact cleaning stage.

.And in Europe the T80 did not reach the end of testing. And T90 passed

In Europe (Sweden, Greece), only the T-80U of ours participated in the tests, and it came out great, but the fact that Leo2 was chosen in both tenders is no longer a matter of technology.

. if the maniac with the Channel mania had not come

Who are you talking about?

. gas stations at gas stations in Europe

There were pipeline troops in the USSR.

Then you can install a turbine on the UAZ, suddenly the situation is stressful, and the driver is nervous. Although nervous people can be treated with an automatic transmission.

Is this why the T80 has a steam pipe filter, because the degree of purification is sooo high?

About the pipeline is even funnier than about the airborne landing with equipment.

[Totor5]

You need something like the T80 Armata. The cart of the old T80 is ungodly outdated - cramped, two boxes and other levers.
If the base of the Armata is shortened by 1 roller and a 1250 turbine is installed there in a block with an automatic transmission and a steering wheel. The tower should be built like the T90m, not from cardboard. Simplify a little on electronics and cas.
Depending on the layout, try to either place the crew in front or in the turret.
Roughly speaking, this would be a normal T80 without old jambs and this would provide the basis for testing the Armata base until the appearance of a normal engine, not X. And subsequently it would provide the basis for the appearance of two types of V diesel engines and a more powerful 1500 gas turbine on a single Armata base .