Specific engine power is a problematic link in domestic tanks

116
Specific engine power is a problematic link in domestic tanks
Diesel V-92S2F with a power of 1130 hp.


Fast means alive


From the very beginning of the special military operation, information appeared about the increased survivability of armored vehicles with high dynamic characteristics. Tankers mentioned a relatively low proportion of destroyed tanks T-80BVM and BMP-3. These are the most powerful armored vehicles in their classes. Of course, comparing the survivability of armored vehicles head-on, based only on specific power, can be very conditional. Moreover, based on the private opinion of individual tankers. This analysis will be fair only after a scrupulous calculation of the number of dead and damaged tanks, taking into account the weapons used against them.



During the Great Patriotic War, specialists from the famous “Armor Institute” or TsNII-48 were engaged in similar work. In particular, the nuances of damage to armor, the calibers used against tanks and the consequences were considered. The statistical sample, of course, was considerable, especially after the Battle of Kursk. Reports were published at different times, for example, “The lethality of Red Army tanks and the reasons for their failure” or “A brief report on combat damage to tanks and self-propelled guns of the 1st Belorussian Front on operations” was published separately for each tank model. It can be assumed that the corresponding work is being carried out now. One of the evidence can be considered the material “Justification of the specific power level of the tank’s power plant” authored by Candidate of Technical Sciences Alexander Shudykin and Doctor of Technical Sciences Denis Shabalin. The authors work at the department of combat tracked and wheeled vehicles and military vehicles of the Omsk Armored Engineering Institute. Analysis and discussion of this publication deserves a separate discussion.


As is known, domestic tanks of the first echelon for special operations are equipped primarily with two types of engines - the 1130-horsepower V-92S2F and the 1250-horsepower gas turbine GTD-1250. The first is mounted on the T-90M Proryv and T-72B3M, the gas turbine is installed in the engine and transmission compartment of the T-80BVM. These are the most powerful domestic tank diesel engines, with the exception of the small-scale 2V-12-3A with a power of 1500 hp. A unique X-shaped 12-cylinder engine is installed on Armata tanks, which, if used in special operations, are used sporadically. Simple calculations show that the specific power of the 46-ton T-72B3M is 24,1 hp/t, and that of the 48-ton T-90M is 23,5 hp/t. and 46-ton T-80BVM - 27,1 hp/t. Based on information about the weight of the Armata of 55 tons, the specific power is 27,2 hp/t. As we can see, the promising Russian tank does not provide a sufficient increase in power supply, remaining at the level of the gas turbine T-80BVM. However, even these conclusions are very approximate - at the moment there is no information that the 2V-12-3A diesel engine has been finalized and is ready for a large series.


Diesel 2V-12-3A for "Armata"

From the outside it seems that the indicated power density of Russian tanks is at least sufficient. Especially when compared with the best examples of foreign technology. For example, the Leopard 2A6 and Abrams M1A2 have a specific power of 24,1 hp/t. More modern cars are less mobile due to increased weight. But here a whole lot of nuances arise.

Firstly, Russian tanks during special operations are forced to be equipped with additional sets of dynamic protection and anti-cumulative shields. The requirements for increased armor protection from all angles became a “discovery” of the special operation, although a similar scenario could have been simulated much earlier. The peculiarity is that tanks are equipped with additional protection both at factories and in front-line workshops. You can safely add several tons to the final mass of the armored vehicle; at the same time, mobility and acceleration on the battlefield decrease.

Secondly, the realities of a special operation do not allow direct comparison of the dynamic characteristics of Russian and foreign tanks simply because the vehicles meet each other extremely rarely. Tank duels, at least over the last couple of years, have become the exception rather than the rule. Therefore, because the Abrams M1A2 has a specific power at the level of the T-72B3M, the crew of the Russian tank is neither warm nor cold. What is much more important is how long it will take the tank to overcome open terrain covered by ATGMs. Or what maximum speed can it produce when moving away from drone-kamikaze. Of course, the tank is initially not very suitable for such games, but every additional kilometer per hour of speed statistically increases survivability from all weapons.

1400 hp for "Breakthrough"


The problem of tank power supply and mobility has always been addressed. Along with firepower and security, this is one of the key parameters of a combat vehicle. The authors of the article mentioned above refer to calculations from the 70s presented in the journal “Bulletin of Armored Equipment,” famous in narrow circles. In particular, there is data on changes in the probability of hitting a tank depending on maneuvering - acceleration, turning radius and turning speed. Interestingly, the probability of hitting a tank tends to zero if its acceleration is about 3 m/s2. Translated into commonly used values, this is a conditional acceleration to hundreds of kilometers per hour in 9,26 seconds. Of course, such dynamic parameters are completely unattainable. For such acceleration, the tank may require a specific power of up to 100 hp/t. That is, a fourfold increase in power with a constant curb weight. The authors of the study claim that the most optimal acceleration acceleration may be in the range of 1,5-2,4 m/s2, that is, approximately 12-19 seconds to hundreds of kilometers. And this, let us remember, is data for 1978, when homing Javelins and kamikaze drones had not yet been heard of. A good tank, in addition to outstanding throttle response, must take turns with a radius of 10-15 meters at a speed of at least 15-20 km/h.

Naturally, the “mad” habits of the tank cannot but affect the manner of firing on the move. Quote from an article by researchers from the Omsk Armored Engineering Institute:

“The reduction in the probability of hitting the target depending on the speed of the tank was obtained mainly at a range of up to 500 meters. This is due to the fact that there is not enough time to refine the aiming of the gun at nearby targets at high vehicle speeds. At distances of more than 500 meters, the probability of hitting a target depending on the speed of movement changed slightly. When the tank's speed is exceeded from 10 to 50 km/h, the following has been established: the increase in speed and force of mechanical disturbances does not cause negative changes in the physiological state of the crew. The target detection range decreased by 20-25 percent, and the firing range at targets decreased by 30-40 percent. Thus, when the tank is moving, the normal work of the crew to control the tank, search for targets and conduct aimed fire at them is possible at a speed of up to 50 km/h.”

But how much do our tankers fire while moving? Especially at a distance of more than 1-1,5 kilometers. The typical work of a tank in a special operation was firing either point-blank while moving, or from a camouflaged firing position, or even from a closed position. The tank, having fired several shells, hastily leaves the position so as not to fall under return fire. This is where the extra power comes in handy.

In the material “Justification of the specific power level of the tank’s power plant,” the authors provide complex algebraic expressions, the conclusion of which is the need to increase the specific power of the tank to 28-30 hp/t. In this case it becomes possible "performing defensive maneuvers that reduce the likelihood of anti-tank weapons hitting the tank" If we take into account the 48-ton T-90M, then a considerable boost in power is required - from 1130 hp. up to 1300-1400 hp Considering that the diesel V-92S2F is based on a block from the V-2, which will soon be 90 years old, the prospects for such a boost seem doubtful. The additional protection that tanks are equipped with in addition to the standard one will force them to increase power to 1350-1450 hp ahead of time. In the case of the Armata, the diesel power will have to be increased to 1650-1700 hp.

It is difficult, but possible, to implement the above in metal. This is at least partially realized due to a noticeable reduction in the service life of the tank engine and, accordingly, the transmission. This indicator can be sacrificed for the possibility of a short-term increase in engine power by 10-20 percent. A kind of afterburner mode is implemented through increasing the maximum engine speed, using special fuel additives and a set of other measures. In any case, it is cheaper and faster than creating a new tank engine. The B-2 series is already approaching its boost limit without a drastic reduction in service life. The T-80BVM gas turbine engine is boosted in a similar way, only this will also be accompanied by a critical increase in fuel consumption. It is difficult to talk about the prospects for boosting the Almata diesel engine, since the unit has not been mastered by the troops, and the childhood diseases inevitable for a new product have clearly not been eliminated.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

116 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +10
    10 January 2024 05: 06
    Thank you for the article! hi
    The T-80BVM gas turbine engine is boosted in a similar way, only this will also be accompanied by a critical increase in fuel consumption.
    How critical is this? Two three ten times the maximum? Surely not, since the afterburner will not be turned on all the time, and multi-hundred-kilometer breakthroughs are not planned. And so the gas turbine showed its viability and necessity in battle.
    And yet, in a number of episodes, the frankly low reverse speed of domestic tanks led to losses. Does the author of the article have any materials or thoughts on this matter?
    1. +4
      10 January 2024 05: 41
      Quote: Vladimir_2U
      in a number of episodes, the frankly low reverse speed of domestic tanks led to losses

      Can you provide links to these episodes?
      1. +9
        10 January 2024 05: 59
        Quote: anatolv

        Can you provide links to these episodes?

        Am I supposed to shovel the whole cart? But I’ll give you a hint: where the tank does not go in reverse, but is forced to turn around, successively exposing the side and then the stern to enemy fire, this is such an episode. And also, by domestic tanks I mean all Soviet ones, unfortunately.

        Something like.
        After successfully completing the task and after receiving a radio command to retreat, tank 623, which had previously rushed forward, began to retreat, not reversing, but turning around. Thus, he put his stern under fire from the enemy.

        https://judgesuhov.livejournal.com/74463.html?ysclid=lr76mq9e3h587864365
        1. +6
          10 January 2024 10: 53
          I will reconcile you.
          The concept of the role of the tank in modern warfare. What tasks should a tank perform and why is it needed in modern warfare. Why are all judgments about a modern tank based on its role in World War II? Are you going to use the new tank in an old war? Yes, in the Northern Military District they fight using the methods of the Great Patriotic War (WWII). And what experience can be learned from this mess? What tank battles, what counter battles and duels, what trips to the front line? You decide. It feels like there is a brain epidemic in the country. From this mess, in the form of confrontation using outdated methods with the use of modern technology and huge losses on both sides, does anyone draw deep conclusions about the features of modern war? Wake up...
          In the Russian Armed Forces there is no concept of modern combat, in general, and the role of the tank in it, as well as the UAV, in particular. And the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, which is responsible for the development and implementation of advanced methods, is in command of this mess. Everyone molds what they are good at, from below they try to change something, and from above this experience is introduced by somehow stupid generals. This is some kind of complete orgy...Gerasimov, where is the concept of conventional combat at the tactical level in modern warfare? How should you fight? What kind of tanks and UAVs, missiles and shells are needed? A ? It’s not for you to sculpt the concept of hybrid war for politicians, they don’t fight it, you’re our genius!
          1. +5
            10 January 2024 11: 01
            Quote: Totvolk80
            Wake up

            Oh, with your comment you abolished tanks and anti-tank weapons, no less... All this exists and is being used and will be used.
            No one has the concept of a battlefield with UAVs, it is only now being born in pain, what the amers used against the slippers is not a battlefield concept.
            1. -5
              10 January 2024 11: 09
              If you studied in a “rural school”, do not know how to use the Internet and have no mental activity, then you have nothing and cannot have it...
              Nobody canceled tanks. They have a different role in modern warfare with developed anti-tank weapons and a new level of technical reconnaissance equipment. But this is not for you. But the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces does not have a concept. How can you fight using ancient instructions and regulations? Since it’s in the Northern Military District, but it’s so difficult to win... And just don’t say that we are at war with NATO. NATO, led by the Amers, staged a massacre, and the level of military skill, or rather, stupidity in this massacre suits them...
              1. +7
                10 January 2024 11: 14
                Quote: Totvolk80
                If you studied in a “rural school”, do not know how to use the Internet and have no mental activity, then you have nothing and cannot have it...

                Wow, serious request. Come on, thinker, bring your vision and concept... And you don’t even have to consider the specific power of tanks within the framework of this “your” concept.
                1. -10
                  10 January 2024 11: 17
                  The main task of modern tanks is shooting from closed positions. And the destruction of pockets of resistance in the 3rd echelon of combat operations.
                  Requirements for performance characteristics follow from this purpose. T-14s do not meet this requirement...And I’m not arguing, I’m explaining to you...
                  I won’t explain the concept of modern combat, it’s impossible! But the concept of a modern operation with a weak enemy was in Iraq. But we in the Northern Military District were unable to implement it - insufficient strength and skills, unprepared command and army...
                  1. +14
                    10 January 2024 11: 27
                    Quote: Totvolk80
                    The main task of modern tanks is shooting from closed positions.

                    Everything is clear with you, thinker from YouTube. The fact that the tanks both fought and are fighting in the built-up areas whistled past you, didn’t even pass by, the fact that they cover infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers on the approaches to the enemy’s strongholds is completely between your ears...

                    Quote: Totvolk80
                    And the destruction of pockets of resistance in the 3rd echelon of combat operations.
                    Whaaat? Hand face... Where are the prerequisites for the emergence of these outbreaks, and what is this 3rd echelon of military operations? Are you, in addition to being an explorer, also an inventor of new meanings?

                    Quote: Totvolk80
                    T-14s do not meet this requirement.
                    There are many complaints about the T-14, but I have never encountered such a narrow-minded and unfair one.
                  2. +5
                    10 January 2024 22: 27
                    Why then are there a bunch of self-propelled guns if tanks are needed only for working from closed positions?
                2. -11
                  10 January 2024 11: 27
                  Put more downvotes and continue to degrade...
                  I am okko077 and vo3a, and I wrote this still 10 years ago and nothing has changed...
                  1. +12
                    10 January 2024 12: 53
                    Put more downvotes and continue to degrade..

                    It is enough to read this thread to be convinced that you are degenerating.
                    Not a single interesting thought, but a bunch of slogans, phenomenal conceit and indiscriminate criticism. It seems like you are writing on psychostimulants.
                    1. -8
                      10 January 2024 13: 05
                      I’m not a collective farmer, and I’m not a sheep in the herd. Read your comments and replies. Empty phrases, no opinions, no analysis, no links. Not a shred of knowledge or information.
                      Behind every phrase I say are years of experience, knowledge and analysis. I don't argue, I tell. This is my balanced, deliberate position and beliefs. I can justify any of my statements and make a link. This is the result of many years of thought. I am a military professional, and be glad that there are such people here...
                      1. +12
                        10 January 2024 15: 43
                        Quote: Totvolk80
                        I am a military professional, and be glad that there are such people here...

                        There are still professional military personnel with a quality education left at VO, but neither they nor the younger generation seem to be inspired by your flight of thoughts. If you really have fundamental considerations for organizing modern combined arms combat, then write articles, convey your baggage to the public, make it a common property. Or at least write a detailed comment and expand on the topic, only without foam and excessive pathos.
                        So far (judging by the rating) the local public has not appreciated your delights about the use of tanks in the third echelon.

                        And as for the talents of Gerasimov and his boss and their role in creating the concept of a small, cozy and compact army for hybrid wars, adequate professionals are unlikely to argue with you here. As well as about their role in the near-catastrophe in the fall of 2022.

                        But nevertheless, conclusions are already being drawn, measures are being taken, shortcomings in the designs of our tanks are being revealed and, to the extent possible, eliminated. Thus, the decision was made to resume production of the T-80 tank in Omsk, in a new modification. With a more powerful gas turbine engine of 1500 l\s. And not only because the capacity of Uralvagonzavod is not enough, as is the capacity of ChTZ to produce engines for the T-90M and T-72B3M, but also because the T-80 has the ability to maneuver at high speed in reverse. And this, as it turned out from the experience of the Northern Military District, greatly affects the survivability of the tank in modern warfare.
                        As for the more powerful engine for the T-90M, it already exists, it is more compact and lighter, and has a base power of as much as 1650 l/s, with the possibility of boosting it to 1950 l/s Yes, this is the engine of the Armata, which is still in production didn’t work (and praise be to Ahura-Mazda for not going in this guise), but both its engine and transmission can be used on the T-90M. I hope that the Almaty side boxes still provide for a high reverse speed. According to recent reports, this engine has been finalized and is being put into production.
                        And the concept of organizing combined arms combat, offensive and defensive operations, is being created right now, based on the experience of the Northern Military District. And no one will post it publicly.
                      2. -5
                        10 January 2024 15: 55
                        And the concept of organizing combined arms combat, offensive and defensive operations, is being created right now, based on the experience of the Northern Military District

                        The experience of the Northern Military District is the experience of how not to fight. What can be developed from it.
                        And that the concept of combat was not needed before the SVO? How did they fight with Georgia, and what about in Syria?
                        But in no way, everything is still based on the courage and self-sacrifice of the Russian soldier, as in the Second World War! Why do we need generals and brilliant staffs then?
                        You don’t know that the information revolution and the revolution in technical means of reconnaissance and target designation have already happened a long time ago! And only here this has not been noticed and has not been noticed for almost 30 years. And what can this phenomenon be called? Moreover, back in 2000, Putin ordered by his decree to develop, create and equip the army with such systems. The military doctrine of 2014 clearly indicates the directions of development and tasks of the Russian Armed Forces in this regard! They developed and created the ESU TK "Sozvezdie-M" and did not fully develop it and do not even know what it is needed for! And how could they develop it if they don’t even have a clue about modern warfare. Maybe it's time to plant?
                      3. +11
                        10 January 2024 17: 09
                        Quote: Totvolk80
                        The experience of the Northern Military District is the experience of how not to fight. What can be developed from it.

                        Experience is always experience. A wise man learns from the mistakes of others, a wise man from his own, and only a fool never learns. And if one can only dream of wisdom, thanks to negative selection in those echelons, then not everyone has lost intelligence in the General Staff. And conclusions are already being drawn. And Experience is always the son of difficult mistakes. And that is why there is no rush yet to launch a general offensive, but the defense industry, troop training, training of command personnel and the development of operational plans are underway.

                        Quote: Totvolk80
                        Why do we need generals and brilliant staffs then?

                        Now - exactly for this. And until September 2022 - mainly for beauty and pathos. For the merchants in power did not prepare for war... but they produced various kinds of PMCs. And in this case I’m not talking about Wagner at all (it was there that the cream of the Russian officers were gathered), but about others - less famous ones. For a merchant's thoughts are always and only about money and profit. A society with such an “elite” always degrades. For this is the rightful place of the Kshatriyas, and partly of the Brahmanas.
                        Quote: Totvolk80
                        Back in 2000, Putin ordered by his decree to develop, create and equip the army with such systems. The military doctrine of 2014 clearly indicates the directions of development and tasks of the Russian Armed Forces in this regard!

                        I am familiar with this topic, although not on a combined arms topic, but nevertheless, under the leadership of my friend, an automated control system for interspecific interaction was created for theater of operations on the army\district\front scale. During the Interaction-2008 exercises, it was used as a reserve, and the exercises took place in conditions “as close as possible to combat”, in a strong interference environment. The main system went down almost immediately, but the backup system bore the brunt of the entire exercise.
                        And this topic was immediately closed, the group was dissolved... the officers were transferred to the reserve, and then dismissed from the army before retirement age... the seconded programmers were recalled back to the institute.
                        It’s just that a new one came to power... A young president and a “brilliant minister of defense” with experience in the production and sale of furniture.
                        Quote: Totvolk80
                        Maybe it's time to plant?

                        Bees don't fight against honey. They don't abandon their own people. And there was a way for young people everywhere only under the genius of Stalin.
                      4. -6
                        10 January 2024 17: 15
                        7 years ago I swami communicated under the flag okko077 and vo3a until I was banned for these topics... for an unlimited period and with a positive rating... And there was no SVO!
                    2. -9
                      10 January 2024 13: 06
                      I’m not a collective farmer, and I’m not a sheep in the herd. Read your comments and replies. Empty phrases, no opinions, no analysis, no links. Not a shred of knowledge or information.
                      Behind every phrase I say are years of experience, knowledge and analysis. I don't argue, I tell. This is my balanced, deliberate position and beliefs. I can justify any of my statements and make a link. This is the result of many years of thought. I am a military professional, and be glad that there are such people here... The commander makes the decision and is responsible for it. We were raised this way from generation to generation...
                3. The comment was deleted.
                  1. +8
                    10 January 2024 11: 32
                    Quote: Totvolk80
                    Put more downvotes

                    Good idea.
                    Quote: Totvolk80
                    and continue to degrade

                    What should you do, who will you hang out with...
                    Fortunately, besides you, there is still someone to communicate with, so I’m holding on... laughing
    2. +5
      10 January 2024 08: 50
      Maybe he doesn’t give it back because he doesn’t see it. Maybe main tanks should have a reversing camera. In the heat of battle, you may not remember what was there, but there are no mirrors and you can’t look through the rear window!
      1. +4
        10 January 2024 09: 00
        Quote: Carib
        Maybe he doesn’t give it back because he doesn’t see it.

        Maybe. But on modernized machines there is such an option. And even if not, then for a long time the actions of the driver in such cases are controlled by the tank commander, and he almost always has an all-round view.
    3. +6
      10 January 2024 11: 33
      On a tank "to escape from a kamikaze drone" Author, are you out of your mind?
      1. +1
        10 January 2024 11: 36
        Quote: Foundling
        On a tank "to escape from a kamikaze drone" Author, are you out of your mind?

        Perhaps we are talking about the fact that drones at low altitude lose the signal and with a jerk you can avoid being hit, try. Although this won’t work against a drone with automatic target acquisition, of course.
        1. +2
          10 January 2024 11: 43
          Yes, you won’t even see this drone in the tank. What kind of breakthrough are we talking about?
          1. +3
            10 January 2024 12: 59
            Yes, you won’t even see this drone in the tank.

            So I read the article and thought, what difference does it make at 25 or 10 km/h when a tank turns into a turn at 60 or 90 km/h on a highway? For a drone, it doesn’t matter; its speed is many times higher; unlike a tank, it has minimal inertia and, most importantly, the tank simply won’t see it.
            In exactly the same way, for evading artillery strikes, such a difference is not particularly important.

            The bottom line is that speed and maneuverability are important in a tank duel.
            But there will be no tank duels in modern military combat.

            If we talk about what needs to be modernized, then we should not push the afterburners, but increase the reliability and survivability of the entire chassis. Because standing up while on the march, in battle, or when leaving an ambush position IS DEATH.
          2. +1
            10 January 2024 13: 15
            Quote: Foundling
            Yes, you won’t even see this drone in the tank. What kind of breakthrough are we talking about?

            But I don’t insist, I didn’t come up with this, I just assumed what the author had in mind. Although with the current development of surveillance devices and cameras, the tank’s blindness is already relative.
    4. -2
      10 January 2024 19: 54
      In jet aviation, afterburner is approximately 5 to 1 compared to dry thrust.
      1. +2
        11 January 2024 03: 40
        Quote: Petrov-Alexander_1Sergeevich
        In jet aviation, afterburner is approximately 5 to 1 compared to dry thrust.

        Even in aviation this is not the case. Because the afterburner ratio to maximum takeoff thrust is 2 to 1, plus or minus.
        In land engines this is even tens of percent. It is most correct to compare a tank turbine with a helicopter turbine.
    5. +4
      11 January 2024 20: 05
      I would like to note that the maneuverability of a tank is influenced not only by the performance characteristics of the engine, transmission, chassis and their “adjustment” and degree of wear, but also by the qualifications of the driver, his working conditions/comfort, and the presence of surveillance devices.
      1. +1
        12 January 2024 03: 37
        Quote: knn54
        and driver qualifications

        hi
  2. +7
    10 January 2024 05: 19
    Duma, designers need to pay close attention to the transmission. Maybe there won't be any need to touch the engine.
  3. The comment was deleted.
    1. +21
      10 January 2024 07: 09
      Unfortunately, the entire line of 12CHN15x18 engines, which has the progenitor V-2, has long been outdated and should be retired. I had to deal with these engines, I am not particularly delighted with them. There is a problem with engines in Russia; the piston engine industry has been destroyed by “knee lifters” and “rubber galosh fighters.” It’s a disastrous business when humanists with all kinds of legal and sociological education take on the management of mechanical engineering. There is only one real solution, to focus as much as possible on gas turbine engines for tanks, there is still no choice. We have a problem with diesel engines, and also with gasoline ones.
      1. +8
        10 January 2024 10: 01
        I’ll add my opinion about the 2V-12-3A diesel engine. The engine needs to be reconfigured, namely the fuel system. Look at the length of the high pressure pipes from the injection pump to the lower injectors. With such a length of tubes, wave phenomena will necessarily occur in the pipelines, and as a result, there will be injections at high speeds. I assume that the sprayers are similar to existing tank diesel engines, i.e. 7 holes 0,1...0,15 mm each, I don’t know what the spray angle is now. During long-term operation of engines, due to injections, coking will develop on the lower nozzles, up to the point of clogging of individual holes. The injectors will start to flow, and the tips of the nozzles may break. Changing the lower injectors on a tank can only be done by removing the engine from the tank, a very fun activity. It is quite possible to use “worm-like” mechanics, and then they will have to “stand on their ears” when removing the injectors. At the factory, at the stand, everything is wonderful, of course, but during actual use in the troops there will be “wild hemorrhoids”. So the engine needs to be rebuilt, install two pumps in “small camber” and supply fuel with short pipes. So 2B-12-3A is also “happiness”.
        1. +3
          10 January 2024 17: 30
          Quote: 2112vda
          I’ll add my opinion about the 2V-12-3A diesel engine. The engine needs to be reconfigured, namely the fuel system. Look at the length of the high pressure pipes from the injection pump to the lower injectors.

          A couple of months ago there was news that this engine had been completed and was being put into production. Allegedly for launching the Armata series... Do you think it’s misleading, or is it being launched in such a crude, unfinished form?
          If the engine was really finished, wouldn’t it be better to test it properly on the T-90MX modification? After all, its transmission (which is for Armata) seems to have a normal reverse speed. The Armata platform is still crude, and the T-14’s armament is not optimal, but on the T-90MX such an engine would be brought to mind and perfection, and the Army would receive a very thrust-armed tank with a reserve of additional armor capabilities.
          1. +1
            11 January 2024 07: 27
            The engine was finished on the bench. All “dead cats” will emerge during long-term service in the army. Engine tuning is a long and expensive process. Now obvious jambs have been removed. So, everything is still ahead, this is true for all engines.
            1. +1
              11 January 2024 13: 51
              This means that it makes even more sense to test this engine on a proven platform before launching it into the T-14 series, otherwise the novelty factor of the Armata will be prohibitive. I think it’s better to test it on the T-80 platform when starting their production in Omsk - the T-80 was originally created as a high-speed tank, and its chassis is the best of the Soviet tanks; the Armata’s chassis was created on its basis. That is, organize the production of the T-80 in two versions at once, release one or two battalion sets of diesel T-80s and test them as actively as possible at the training grounds and fronts of the Northern Military District. When the new engine is cured of childhood illnesses, launch this version of the T-80 into wide series.
              Armata, as a platform for MBT, is justified in only two configurations:
              - combination 125 mm. main guns and 30 mm. machine;
              - combination 152 mm. main guns and 30 mm. machine gun
              In both cases, it is desirable to place a 30 mm combat module. guns on an uninhabited main battery turret as an autonomous module. Exactly as envisaged in a number of promising projects at the turn of the 80s - 90s. Those. combining the functions of a tank and BMPT/ShMPP in an MBT.
  4. +2
    10 January 2024 05: 21
    A kind of afterburner mode is implemented by increasing the maximum engine speed, the use of special fuel additives and a set of other measures.

    Aren't there other ways?
    In any case, it's cheaper and faster than creating a new tank engine.

    But has something limited us in creating a new (engine) over the past 80 years after the Second World War?
  5. +3
    10 January 2024 05: 28
    I’m interested in something else - the repairability of our equipment:
    Why? - a reaction has appeared to the exploitation of Leopards on the battlefield and it raises many questions about the decisions taken in it - both constructive and technological solutions
    In “this light” I would like to understand how justified such approaches to military equipment are, or, in another way, I will say: is the complication of the design worth the gain that was expected? - and all this is “within the framework” of maintainability
    1. 0
      10 January 2024 06: 22
      Our non-brothers are also interested.
  6. +9
    10 January 2024 05: 45
    Quote: Dedok
    But has something limited us in creating a new (engine) over the past 80 years after the Second World War?

    Nothing, and new engines were made. Very interesting.
    Unfortunately, Nikita, his mother, Sergeevich, having killed heavy tank building, also killed new engines.
    Then the saga with the TD-5 began, then the turbine came out, then perestroika, a shootout.
    However, the B series engines have a significant reserve that is misused. If the monitoring station is replaced with a turbocharger, this will return 150-200 horses to the shaft.
    However, why ask stupid questions when you can simply open Zubov, “Tank Engines,” in two parts.
    1. +1
      10 January 2024 17: 34
      Quote: Grossvater
      "B" series engines have significant misused reserves. If the monitoring station is replaced with a turbocharger, this will return 150-200 horses to the shaft.

      That is, instead of the current 1130 l/s, this engine will be able to produce 1300 l/s+?
      If so, then the old B-2 still has a lot ahead.
    2. +1
      10 January 2024 17: 34
      Quote: Grossvater
      "B" series engines have significant misused reserves. If the monitoring station is replaced with a turbocharger, this will return 150-200 horses to the shaft.

      That is, instead of the current 1130 l/s, this engine will be able to produce 1300 l/s+?
      If so, then the old B-2 still has a lot ahead.
    3. +1
      10 January 2024 22: 00
      [quote]If the monitoring station is replaced with a turbocharger, this will return 150-200 horses to the shaft./quote] The B 92 does not use a monitoring station; a turbocharger is already installed on it.
  7. -6
    10 January 2024 06: 20
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    Am I supposed to shovel the whole cart?

    Good excuse! At the dawn of the Internet, such excuses were widely used, saying that you couldn’t find it, you can’t look for the culprit yourself. Only in a normal discussion should the side that refers to them provide evidence of the truth of their statements.
    1. +3
      10 January 2024 08: 54
      Quote: anatolv
      Good excuse! At the dawn of the Internet, such excuses were widely used, saying that you couldn’t find it, you can’t look for the culprit yourself. Only in a normal discussion should the side that refers to them provide evidence of the truth of their statements.

      Set up a cart and at least look at these arguments. But if you are stupid and don’t understand the first time, then read it again:
      But I’ll give you a hint: where the tank does not go in reverse, but is forced to turn around, successively exposing the side and then the stern to enemy fire, this is such an episode. And also, by domestic tanks I mean all Soviet ones, unfortunately.
      1. -2
        10 January 2024 08: 57
        Here you go! And we’ve already switched to obscene language! Not enough arguments? Happens!
        1. -1
          10 January 2024 09: 03
          Do you understand the meaning of the word “obscene”?
          Quote: anatolv
          Not enough arguments? Happens!
          Those. You don’t have enough telegrams to send and videos of tanks being used. It's clear. Well, can you at least master YouTube?
  8. +5
    10 January 2024 07: 09
    They need reverse gear the same as forward gear with reverse control. There is enough power there, the problem is in its implementation
  9. -1
    10 January 2024 07: 26
    For some reason, we have a very negative attitude towards turbines, and you can’t accelerate a diesel engine much. Nowadays, all turbine cars, whether one likes it or not, are made to fall in love with the Chinese. I have been using a turbine for so long and I think this is the best solution, minimal consumption, smaller dimensions, and a disproportionate increase in dynamics. Military engines must be turbo, especially in the first line.
    1. +6
      10 January 2024 11: 29
      “Nowadays all cars are turbine, whether someone likes it or not..”
      Don't confuse a cherub with a hairdresser fool , i.e. a turbocharger, which is equipped with all modern tank diesel engines, and a gas turbine engine, used among MBTs only on the T-80 and Abrams.
      Before talking about “evasion maneuvers” from ATGMs or drones, shooting “on the fly”, you need to drive a tank yourself off-road, or on the road at a speed of at least 35-45 km/h and much will become clear. On the move, on the ground, the tank fires, on average, at a speed of 12 - 20 km/h, otherwise no STV gun will be able to hold it, and at a speed of 45 km/h you need to be an experienced fighter so that in a vehicle with a fair amount of inertia you do not fly into a ditch . This is “not at all the same” in comparison with a passenger car (and a truck too). There is nothing to say about the movement in the column.
      “Stuffing” more power into a tank is a problem. And not just the layout plan. Fuel consumption.....
      In war, there is a difference in delivering 1 ton of diesel fuel for a diesel engine or 1,8 - 2 tons for a gas turbine engine. They carry everything under fire. This, along with the high cost and high consumption of not only diesel fuel (kerosene), but also air (and on the ground there is a lot, a lot of dust, this is not the sky) hinders the use of gas turbine engines.
      There is an optimal specific power per ton of mass. This is 23-25 ​​l/s/t. Such a tank is quite mobile. What should be done to improve the power plant of MBT and other armored vehicles? And also the transmission and chassis, because these are parts of “one body”. Change the platform to the well-known Armata. But in terms of economic and technological issues, mass production of the new generation is hardly possible during the war, and while the T-90M and 80 will still serve, they are quite maneuverable, although there is no ideal. If it is achievable at all. wink
    2. +1
      11 January 2024 00: 33
      Chinese passenger car turbo engines were originally European or Japanese.
  10. +6
    10 January 2024 07: 37
    For example, the Leopard 2A6 and Abrams M1A2 have a specific power of 24,1 hp/t.
    Both tanks have 1500 hp engines, but their masses are different and how does it turn out that the specific power is the same? Leo2A6 with a mass of 62,5 tons has a specific power of 24 hp/t, and for M1A2 SEP2, with a mass of 63,2 tons = 23,7 hp/t.
    And the main problem of our tanks is the outdated transmission, it’s high time to install armored gearboxes at least equipped with reverse, which has long been worked out by the same Tagilians
  11. 0
    10 January 2024 07: 45
    Good article.
    Only slightly oriented towards "old technologies".
    For an example of the “old thinking”: they made a new engine with more power - which means more armor can be attached - the gain is, of course, significant and useful, but not in this topic.
    And if you cope with using what you have: in modern warfare, tanks are mobile artillery. Accordingly, for positional confrontation, self-propelled guns are enough, but for maneuvers it is better to look towards the protection and cost of helicopters, developing towards equipment operating on/near the ground based on "quads" and "magnetic/air cushion"
  12. 0
    10 January 2024 08: 04
    A sequential hybrid seems to be the solution
  13. -1
    10 January 2024 09: 05
    I wonder if the GTD-1250 engine will fit into the MTO of the T-72B3/T90M tanks? In light of the fact that we have now regained the competence to fully assemble the new GTD-1250, we can transfer all our tanks to it...
  14. 0
    10 January 2024 09: 06
    I wonder if the GTD-1250 engine will fit into the MTO of the T-72B3/T90M tanks? In light of the fact that we have now regained the competence to fully assemble the new GTD-1250, we can transfer all our tanks to it...
  15. +3
    10 January 2024 10: 17
    Speed, chases, engine... And all this on the levers, looking through a narrow gap.
    The tank, even at old speeds, demolishes everything in the vicinity during a banal haul, but here it will rush for hundreds of miles off-road... well.
    Why only a tank? What about the rest - infantry fighting vehicles, Grads? Doesn't the city need to move away from the drone at 150 km/h off-road?
  16. 0
    10 January 2024 10: 18
    Quote: Yuri77
    I wonder if the GTD-1250 engine will fit into the MTO of the T-72B3/T90M tanks? In light of the fact that we have now regained the competence to fully assemble the new GTD-1250, we can transfer all our tanks to it...


    God forbid
  17. +8
    10 January 2024 10: 20
    From the very first lines.
    How can you publish such technically illiterate articles? However, if the main source of knowledge is copy-paste from the Internet, then it is not surprising. What kind of nonsense is there?
    Author, specific power is an indicator solely of the engine. The tank has a power supply. lol
  18. +1
    10 January 2024 10: 23
    Quote: svp67
    For example, the Leopard 2A6 and Abrams M1A2 have a specific power of 24,1 hp/t.
    Both tanks have 1500 hp engines, but their masses are different and how does it turn out that the specific power is the same? Leo2A6 with a mass of 62,5 tons has a specific power of 24 hp/t, and for M1A2 SEP2, with a mass of 63,2 tons = 23,7 hp/t.
    And the main problem of our tanks is the outdated transmission, it’s high time to install armored gearboxes at least equipped with reverse, which has long been worked out by the same Tagilians


    There's too much need to redo it, it's easier to just do something new. Such thoughts were most likely there. But the X engine is a strange idea, I think it’s cooler than the T64 in maintenance. And where else can it be placed besides Armata? Ships, diesel locomotives... probably not.
  19. +3
    10 January 2024 11: 07
    The problem is that the power supply of a tank is not directly related to mobility. Between them stands a transmission that can kill any good initiative.
    Remember the T-34: 500 horses for 26 tons, more than 19 hp/t. Almost a third more than the modern “three-ruble ruble” (300 hp for 20 tons, 15 hp/t). But the Kharkov unit goes into battle at 12 km/h, because this is the maximum for the main “off-road” second gear. It is not recommended to change gears, as this slows the tank down to a stop and threatens to stall the engine.
    If we take modern times, then we have the famous problem of the reverse speed of the T-72 and its modifications, which cannot be cured in any way by simply increasing the engine power.
  20. +1
    10 January 2024 11: 33
    The whole problem boils down to the method and device for converting the kinetic energy of continuous media into their potential energy. For ten years now, everyone has simply ignored the decision to replace all types of propellers, propellers, and impellers with a new device that fundamentally changes the energy of the physical process.
    1. +1
      10 January 2024 15: 17
      What are you about? Teleportation or something, or the attraction of two objects to each other?
    2. +2
      10 January 2024 20: 02
      The whole problem boils down to the method and device for converting the kinetic energy of continuous media into their potential energy.
      Hooray! Gridasov has appeared!!! It's been a long time since it happened!!! How is Odessa? What can you see through the window?
      1. +1
        10 January 2024 22: 12
        Does he live in Odessa?
        1. +1
          11 January 2024 08: 15
          Does he live in Odessa?
          I wrote from there before. Where it comes from now is unclear. Without him, VO became boring.
    3. +1
      10 January 2024 22: 11
      I’m very glad to see your lines again... I haven’t seen your comments for a very long time. I hope you are in good health. I also congratulate you on the past holidays.
  21. 0
    10 January 2024 11: 38
    It would be interesting to see the opinion of the tankers themselves, the driver’s mechanic, etc.
  22. 0
    10 January 2024 12: 22
    The T-80BVM gas turbine engine is boosted in a similar way, only this will also be accompanied by a critical increase in fuel consumption.

    I don’t see any particular problems with the engine for the T80.
    Our GTD-1250 engine is manufactured by KiDvi PJSC. "Kaluga engine".
    Anyone can look at the site using the link https://kadvi.ru/product/gdt-1250/ and see:
    Scientific and technical solutions used in the development of the GTD-1250 created a great modernization potential for the product and provide opportunities for successful implementation:
    - gas turbine engine with hydrostatic transmission (GOP);
    - On-board information and control system (BIUS);
    - Forced mode with increased power up to 1400 hp;
    - A single aggregated power plant (gas turbine engine, gas turbine engine and transmission in one unit) with a capacity of 1800 - 2000 hp;

    From what is written here, I see only one problem in increasing the power of the T-80.
    This is the problem - the military doesn’t need it.
    The Belarusians have created a new BelAZ-7558N mining dump truck. Powered by liquefied methane.
    The basis of the machine’s energy is MSU 800, a universal power module. In this module, the GTD-1250 turns the generator, the generator provides electric current to the motor-wheel units.
    Power - 1200 HP
    That is, Old Man needed it - he ordered a gas-powered version of the GTE 1250. KaDvi received the order - KaDvi fulfilled it.
    KaDvi ALREADY has options of 1 - 400 - 1 hp. What problems?
    MO doesn't need this.
  23. +3
    10 January 2024 12: 50
    Power density is now the same problem as scratches on armor. Sucked from your finger.
  24. +5
    10 January 2024 13: 28
    I would like to remind the author that in addition to engine power, reliability and maintainability are no less important factors. "Leopard 2" has a more powerful engine and does it help it a lot?
  25. Eug
    +3
    10 January 2024 13: 34
    If it’s not a secret, for what reason does the V-92S2F diesel plate (V-92S2F2 too) look like the flag of Ukraine?
  26. +1
    10 January 2024 13: 34
    The problem of modern piston internal combustion engines lies in the unsatisfactory operation of the crankshaft - there is pressure - there is no shoulder, and vice versa, i.e. the mechanical efficiency of the conversion is slightly higher than 30%, which means wasteful fuel consumption, large mass and dimensions of the engine, structural complexity, etc. Instead of a crankshaft, you need to install a gear rack, preferably closed, the pressure will immediately be converted into work, and in this case it will even be possible to lower the thermal efficiency in order to increase power (fuel consumption, compared to the “traditional” conversion to an internal combustion engine, will not increase), and you will be happy. And producing X-shaped monsters for “disposable” (in the sense of - designed for one army operation) equipment is wasteful.
    1. 0
      10 January 2024 17: 10
      Quote: Vovanya
      the mechanical conversion efficiency is slightly higher than 30%, which means wasteful fuel consumption, large mass and dimensions of the engine, and structural complexity,
      Sorry, I'm not good at the topic. But I read about the Stirling engine. Is it really still difficult to produce? recourse
      1. +2
        10 January 2024 18: 27
        But I read about the Stirling engine. Is it really still difficult to produce?

        It is not particularly complicated in production (depending on which one - there are several varieties), but it is complicated in calculations. And it is inappropriate to use “pure” stirling - it is low-power, it is necessary to combine cycles in a special way, for example, diesel-stirling - this direction is very promising for military equipment.
  27. 0
    10 January 2024 14: 15
    the best examples of foreign technology. For example, Leopard 2A6 and Abrams M1A2

    This completely finished me off, after which I just skimmed through it.
    A6 and M1A2 are the same age as the T-90A.
    As I understand it, the author hasn’t heard anything about the development of tanks for about 20 years.
    Let's get real about modern tanks. K2, Type 10, Chinese ZTZ of the latest models, Merkava 4, Abrams has already gone A3 and there, like on the most advanced Leopards, they turned towards protection and survivability, like on the Merkava, the Germans are already turning their Leopards around a lot, and we need to turn to promising ones projects for the modernization of old tanks, the same Challenger 3, Singapore Leopards, Israeli and Turkish M60s, in order to understand what is being done to old tanks over the hill and why, if they decide to compare with analogues.
    But why, if the unfinished Armata has an engine no worse than the Leopard of the 90s.
    The same is about nonsense about breaking away from the FPV chase and a logical error when passing off smaller losses of newer equipment as merit of specific power, and a fool understands that the T-90M under the same circumstances will be more difficult to destroy than the T-72B
  28. +2
    10 January 2024 14: 18
    I read the “comments” on this article... The reading public of VO, this article, even got out of bed at five o’clock in the morning... In short, everyone “got excited” with the addition of the word “actually”... I’ll try, too, to insert “my high fives.” kopecks" into this controversy. It’s difficult to argue with the (probably) unrecognized geniuses of tank strategy in modern warfare, such as “Totvolk80”, but I will express cautious confidence that quite serious “skulls” are working in this direction... I take into account the “novelty” of combat operations in the current North Military District , which is difficult to “apply” to all operations using tanks; over the last 78 years, tactics have been developed, I dare to assure you all.... Yes! It’s complicated, contradictory, with “plugs”, BUT it’s going.... Don’t forget that our aircraft are only now becoming combat aircraft, with the addition of the word “actually”, throwing off the “fleur” of the ceremonial biathlon aircraft, forming new views, tactics and strategies. And all this “goes” along with the formation of new views on war in the General Staff of the Russian Federation... It is difficult to rebuild the “machine” of war in a month or even a year, especially in Russia, especially in the current socio-economic conditions of its development (capitalism) ... When in the last 30-odd years “general indifference” has overwhelmed everything and everyone, where the country, its people, honor, intelligence, even military intelligence, have become a commodity, and the country has been “bent over” into the pose of a “running Egyptian”... Yes, with “tank engines”, after the diesel engine for the T-34, it has always been difficult for us... Maybe we can go according to the “Chinese scenario”, taking into account our very serious technological developments in the production of alloys and metal processing? And we will be happy! So, I think, we will deal with the tank “hearts” and master new tactical techniques for using armored vehicles in modern combat. Something like this.....
  29. +4
    10 January 2024 15: 02
    Installing more powerful engines is generally a “nothing” exercise.
    Our tanks already have a higher specific power due to their smaller tonnage. Firstly.
    Secondly. No matter how much you increase the power, the speed of the tank will still not compare with the speed of the weapons attacking the tank. here the main reason is the slow reaction of tank crews, both as a result of their low awareness of the situation, and the limit of human capabilities (detection of danger, its awareness, speed of reaction to a certain danger and its correctness). The automation of some processes could improve the situation a little, but that is still a long way off.
    Therefore, there is no point in installing a particularly powerful engine, because the speed of execution of protective actions will not increase significantly, and they do not take up the lion’s share of the reaction time, but the detection of danger as such and the awareness of actions to protect against it.
    But the mass of the tank, fuel consumption, difficulty of operation and maintainability on the battlefield (or near it) will increase significantly.
  30. +1
    10 January 2024 15: 20
    And yet, in a number of episodes, the frankly low reverse speed of domestic tanks led to losses. Does the author of the article have any materials or thoughts on this matter?


    In order to increase the reverse speed, a more powerful engine is required - on tanks with good reverse gear, the engine efficiency when driving in a straight line is slightly lower.

    And I completely agree that this is important. I saw a video of ours slowly crawling back while the enemy was actively working on Rome.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  31. 0
    10 January 2024 15: 30
    Just now I read an article about how an Indian had a T-72 turret installed on a T-90. The same could have been done with the T-62. as this was done with the T-34 several times during the war
  32. +1
    10 January 2024 15: 33
    Before the SVO, the defense industry almost did not work, in particular on old tanks
    I even used to think that all the old tanks could be repaired and sold
  33. +2
    10 January 2024 15: 50
    It is necessary to use new technologies and materials, the most obvious example is composite materials, this will not only make a more powerful engine, but also significantly reduce the weight of the tank. The second thing is that it is necessary to change the layout of the armor of tanks, if previously the main armor was in front, and then the armor was based on a secondary principle, then in the future the main danger will come from the air, from UAVs, and from infantry with different types of RPGs, which mainly hit the side of the tank.
  34. -1
    10 January 2024 16: 05
    Quote: Ivan Seversky
    CENTROARTS


    The engine is normal, the problem is in the design - a new gearbox and steering wheel are needed. But this means remaking the entire tank. And who needs this if there is Armata? Therefore, the T72/90 are the tanks of this war and the lack of reverse speed in this war cannot be changed, but in the new one we are already relying on Armata. But the T90 has other advantages and is overall the best tank of this war.
    The T80 has a different design, but has disadvantages in armor and costs. In fact, this is also an outdated tank, in which no one will invest globally anymore.
    True, the X-shaped engine of the Armata is causing controversy. It would seem that another new light tank is needed, but this is unlikely since there are already tens of thousands of T72/80/90.
  35. 0
    10 January 2024 16: 08
    Quote: “It’s interesting that the probability of hitting a tank tends to zero if its acceleration acceleration is about 3 m/s2. Translated into commonly used values, this is a conditional acceleration to hundreds of kilometers per hour in 9,26 seconds. Of course, such dynamic parameters are absolutely not achievable. For such throttle response, the tank may require a specific power of up to 100 hp/t."
    Although the indicated values ​​were clearly obtained purely mathematically, they clearly show the dead end of the path to increasing the specific power of the tank.
    In general, given the need to increase the mobility of tanks and the lack of need for a large power reserve, it is necessary to consider the possibility of using a traditional gas turbine engine with a gas turbine engine or a hybrid engine with a supercapacitor on a tank. And automatic shotguns will deal with drones, as long as the detection system can cope.
  36. +1
    10 January 2024 16: 32
    France and Germany now have modern mass-produced diesel engines.
    But you need to compare the technical specifications from the Russian Federation for tank diesel and from NATO......requirements for fuel, operation without oil, etc.
    So the L5 diesel from Kamaz - 12 liters of volume - 450-750 hp (versions of 6 cylinders have been announced. If you make a B12 and 24-26 liters of volume, then you can reach 1500 hp. Considering the German roots and tractor origin of the Kamaz diesel engine, probably something similar on Leo.
  37. +4
    10 January 2024 16: 40
    My dear invisible friends. Please do not upset, let alone insult, the participants of V.O. With respect to all S.V.
  38. +1
    10 January 2024 17: 04
    In fact, the safety of the tank is ensured by preliminary processing of the enemy.
    Even if you give the tank the speed of an airplane, without cover, it will be shot down.
    An analogy suggests itself: release infantry into a position and add........ to speed it up.
    The function of a tank is not to rush across the field. It can be easily knocked out at a distance of 1.5 km and 100 meters. And it doesn’t matter how fast he runs this route.
  39. +4
    10 January 2024 17: 54
    I worked on electric-assisted turbocharging of diesel engines. Tests were made (November-December 2005, Kolomna Plant, reports are there), which showed the high potential of this approach. The problem was that the management of SKB Turbochargers (Penza) are thieves (for example, the director is Kireev). The main Fuhrer of this project is Potanin V.A. suffered from the illness of a provincial Soviet leader - when things were getting at least some result, he took actions that reduced everything to zero (and then he happily ran to beg for more money..)
    You can link to this story here

    https://topwar.ru/222170-istorija-popytki-sozdanija-sistemy-giperbar-v-rossii.html

    By the way, in the spring of 2019, the former Chief Power Engineer of PenzDieselMash, Eremin, calls me and offers to continue the project (by the way, he is a friend of the Head of Government of the Penza region)
    I refused because this figure was fixated like a maniac in 2007-9 on the idea of ​​stealing all the money and pretending to be fools...
    And in 2009, I almost made the electronics for the second generation of this system.
  40. -1
    10 January 2024 19: 48
    Unique X-shaped 12-cylinder engine

    From the royal tiger
    1. +1
      10 January 2024 21: 56
      There was a V12, X diesel engine originally from aviation... on the Junkers, it seems. But this is just a diagram. 5tdf also from German aviation
      1. 0
        11 January 2024 10: 52
        Unique X-shaped 12-cylinder engine

        From the royal tiger

        From a Jagdtiger with a Porsche suspension. And there are 16 cylinders. It was tested here in the Urals, and it showed itself quite well.
        But this is a dead end. In our climate, a 2000 hp gas turbine engine is the right way. with hydrostatic reverse transmission. If tanks do not go into a deep breakthrough, then fuel consumption is not critical. You can try a hybrid with a supercapacitor; in addition to being fully reversible, it provides snorkel-free crossing of deep water obstacles.
        1. -1
          11 January 2024 16: 15
          The Ferdinand power plant had a very original design - torque from the engines to the drive wheels was transmitted electrically. Thanks to this, the car did not have such components as a gearbox and main clutch. The self-propelled gun had two V-shaped 12-cylinder carburetor water-cooled Maybach HL 120 TRM engines, installed in parallel, with a power of 265 hp each. With. (at 2600 rpm).




          All tank engines come from aviation ones. B2, it seems, too.
      2. +1
        12 January 2024 13: 35
        There were no X-patterns in the series at all; this was a dead-end direction.
        Except for the ship's GMC Pancake, but that was a 2-stroke, and these are completely different solutions with balancing.
        And for ease of maintenance, it was placed vertically and drove the propeller shaft through the tip.
        1. 0
          12 January 2024 14: 05
          On boats they use outboard motors - that’s how they are installed even now.
  41. +2
    10 January 2024 19: 50
    Much more important

    Reverse speed and transmission/gearbox.
  42. -1
    10 January 2024 19: 57
    If diesels are 1130 hp. enough not only for the T-90M, but also for the modernized T-72 - our tanks will not have any problems with power density. Well, for the T-80BVM they resumed production of 1200 hp turbines. - there will be no problems with specific power there.
    Armata needs HER engine, and not the one she is currently driving - there will be no problems either.
    The inability to move in reverse at high speed is a problem, but not of the engine, but of the gearbox.
    1. 0
      10 January 2024 21: 59
      T90M is the weight limit for the cart and engine. Western cars are initially one size larger than -7 rollers. That’s why they allow the weight to be increased to 70 tons. But 150mm ATGM and FPV drones with RPG7 grenade. They showed that the beauty of armor and weight has been achieved. And the benefit performance and panacea of ​​Active KAZ ... is not designed for FPV.
  43. fiv
    0
    10 January 2024 20: 24
    If the probability of a missile being destroyed in the initial part of its trajectory increases, this must be counteracted not only by increasing the dynamic characteristics of the launch vehicle. For this, even new units with new tactics must be created. Not rocket ones. And much more. Also with tanks and their power density. This is just one stone from a stone wall. But it also needs to be studied carefully. And a sharp start is the destiny of the electric drive. We need a hybrid drive: diesel - generator - battery - inverter - electric. engine. The efficiency of the system will decrease, more space will be required, reliability will decrease, and throttle response will increase. You have to pay for everything. Dixi.
  44. -2
    10 January 2024 23: 40
    well, yes, the B2 line, the turbine on the T80, the new engine on the T14, some are already outdated, but the new engine is apparently what is holding the new tank back. Somehow it’s not possible to make modern engines in this Russian Federation, this also applies to civilians, by the way engines and even aviation ones, for some reason Russian engines have ceased to be produced, the only engines for which we, the Russian people, can be proud are the USSR NK33 and RD170 engines, something that no one else makes in the world.
  45. 0
    10 January 2024 23: 41
    well, yes, the B2 line, the turbine on the T80, the new engine on the T14, some are already outdated, but the new engine is apparently what is holding the new tank back. Somehow it’s not possible to make modern engines in this Russian Federation, this also applies to civilians, by the way engines and even aviation ones, for some reason Russian engines have ceased to be produced, the only engines for which we, the Russian people, can be proud are the USSR NK33 and RD170 engines, something that no one else makes in the world.
    1. 0
      12 January 2024 13: 51
      If now we are drawn to the V-2 with solutions of the late 20s, then the Kharkov engine “470” (V-12, 4-stroke, 1500 hp) of the late 70s would provide perspective.
      1. 0
        17 January 2024 21: 24
        I’m from Kharkov, the factories are great, but the Ukrainians are...
  46. 0
    15 January 2024 14: 48
    Is the pursuit of idealism stupidity or sabotage? What does the engine weigh - 800 kg? Put two or double the weight! The increase in the total weight of the tank is insignificant.
  47. +1
    15 January 2024 14: 50
    Quote: JustMe

    The problem was that the management of SKB Turbochargers (Penza) are thieves (for example, the director is Kireev). The main Fuhrer of this project is Potanin V.A. suffered from the disease of a provincial Soviet leader - when things were going to at least some result, he took actions that reduced everything to zero (and then he happily ran to beg for more money..)

    this story is not only about Penza - it is “all around”...
    hence the astronomical amounts and murky time frames for the implementation of R&D, and the introduction of completed work into production
    and as for the “electric drive” - this is of course the “future” (not in vain - the “gloomy genius” tried to implement it 80 years ago), but today, with “our” level of attitude towards technology, the most correct thing is not to touch anything!
    look what is happening with Leopards: practically not only repairs but also maintenance must be done in a special center, “on the spot” - nothing is done, hence the attitude towards them - “from the other side”
    In our country, a lot of things are done by the rembat - “on the spot”!
    and given the logistics of logistics support, it’s better not to touch anything, forcing you to fulfill the requirements for maintenance and repair - back in the “shaggy years”, and this is easier in our situation
  48. 0
    15 January 2024 23: 59
    It is possible and necessary to improve the dynamic qualities of tanks. Just don’t elevate them to absolutes. The main reason for the moderate dynamics is that the tanks do not move along the autobahn, but over very rough terrain, and on it the speed of movement is limited not by the engine power, but by the speed of the crew’s perception of information. Therefore, an increase in power density will not lead to an increase in average speeds. And this is also in Soviet works.
  49. 0
    16 January 2024 13: 42
    If we adopt the tactics of defensive/positional actions, as in the article, then it is not clear why the tank needs such thick armor??? And overweight?? Anti-fragmentation armor is enough and perhaps make anti-cumulative and relatively light armor in 2-3 layers??? Then the power density can be significantly increased.
    Thick armor is needed only in offensive operations...
    1. 0
      16 January 2024 19: 01
      Armor is needed in all types of combat. While the enemy is hitting the tank, the infantry can solve its problems.
    2. 0
      16 January 2024 19: 02
      Armor is needed in all types of combat. While the enemy is hitting the tank, the infantry can solve its problems.
  50. 0
    17 January 2024 20: 01
    What is there to think? Everything is elementary simple.) Automobile manufacturers produce “Modern” internal combustion engines using hybrid components, namely internal combustion engine + electromotor. And when the question arises about the lack of power and how to increase it, for some reason they begin to invent X-shaped, gas turbine, etc., etc. So everything has already been invented.))) Dear tank diesel engineers! It's high time to use a diesel + electric motor combination. And 1700 l. C. There will be no limit to the acceleration of the dynamic characteristics of a diesel engine, without compromising the reliability of the diesel engine. Question: where is this hybrid? He is not there, but I hope he will appear in the near future......
  51. 0
    17 January 2024 21: 23
    Ukrainians drown 1400 a little for Abrams from 1500 hp and above
  52. +1
    17 January 2024 23: 54
    The article is interesting, good, with numbers and facts. Thanks to the author for this summary of information. But I would like to add “a fly in the ointment”... Not out of harm, but for the sake of truth. The title of the article itself contains an INACCURACY!!! In fact, we are not talking about the specific power of the ENGINE, but about the specific power of the TANK. The specific power of the engine can be liter (kW/l), piston (kW/dm2), overall (kW/m3). And these types of specific power are determined only by the parameters of the ENGINE, without taking into account the carrier. This is just classic information from engine theory. And the article talks about the power supply of the TANK! Those. ENGINE power is compared (correlated) with the mass of the TANK (kW/t or hp/t). This is a slightly different indicator, although it is directly related to engine power. This is what the article is about...
  53. +1
    18 January 2024 20: 55
    How can you trust the author’s conclusions in any way if he confuses the specific power of the engine and the specific power of the tank?
  54. +1
    20 January 2024 00: 27
    The speed of movement of almost any existing tank on a dirt road is 50 km/h, on an intersection - 30 km/h
    This speed is also provided by serial T-72 and T-62 engines.
    It is much more useful to have a modern remote sensing system, a good thermal imager and reliable communications protected from electronic warfare on the tank.
  55. 0
    22 January 2024 19: 03
    I read the article and the comments to it with great interest. Discussion and exchange of opinions are always useful. I am not an expert in the field of tank building, much less in the tactics of combat operations. What connects me with tanks is that during the Second World War two of my cousins ​​were burned in tanks in the famous tank battle on the Kursk Bulge, and my brother fought in amphibious vehicles as part of a tank division since 1943, and after the war he graduated from the I Armored Academy .IN. Stalin, and before retiring with the rank of colonel, he served as deputy commander for the technical department of a tank division. After graduating from the Moscow Institute of Chemical Engineering in 1951, I worked in production, then in research institutes and design bureaus, and from 1991 to the present day at my own company in the creation and implementation of new technologies, new innovative equipment, for jointing narrow places at the request of enterprises in various industries, to replace unsatisfactorily functioning imported equipment, etc.
    Many of our developments have been introduced into industry in Russia and abroad and have no analogues in the world. A number of foreign companies have offered and continue to offer financing and production of our innovative equipment from them, but we, who were patriotically brought up under Soviet power, want these innovations to be introduced in Russia. A number of our developments have dual purposes. We contacted the government, the Ministry of Industry and Trade, the Federation Council, etc., in order to provide assistance in accelerating the implementation of our developments in Russia. But, unfortunately, our requests either remained unanswered or received empty replies. In 2018, we received a patent for the invention of an engine of a fundamentally new design and wanted to develop, manufacture and bring to mass production an engine with a power of 1500 hp. for use on tanks, helicopters, etc. We were corrected that it is better for a tank to have a 2000 hp engine. Our small enterprise cannot cope with such work without financial support from the state. But as we later understood from one of the government resolutions, the Ministry of Industry and Trade finances only concerns and large enterprises. We also realized that under the capitalism built in Russia, innovation, especially those created by small enterprises, is not needed. Maybe someone can tell me where the way out of this dead end is, who else I can turn to? You cannot endlessly modernize and use outdated technology. Or wait until a return to everything good that happened under the USSR begins. I won't live to see that. We need to work on creating new things, including engines with reduced fuel consumption, higher efficiency, and reduced weight and size characteristics. Without the creation and implementation of new technology there can be no progress, no movement forward. I remember the correct words of Comrade. Stalin to “search, find and use.” I don’t remember where and when I heard these words from the leader, but these words were forever etched in my memory. Sorry for the long review of the article. I tried to make it shorter, but apparently age is taking its toll.
    With deep respect to the authors and to all participants in the discussion.
  56. 0
    12 February 2024 11: 25
    The article, in my humble opinion, is populist: the West is doing great, but we are not doing well, thank God. The substitution of concepts about energy availability and power density in a number of posts indicates the level of controversy. In the realities of today, many proposals are at least not relevant and not possible in their essence. BUT....work in design bureaus and factories to revise and possibly implement the experience of technical improvement of tanks based on the experience of "SVO" must be given priority. The V-92S2F2 engines for the most part satisfy the realities of today, the snag is in the transmission and many rightly see this as one of the significant shortcomings. I believe that the biggest problem is the level of awareness and, accordingly, the reaction of the crew (psychophysiological factor) to changes in the environment, and here the “information and combat system”, possibly with AI elements, comes to the fore. The crew must see EVERYTHING that surrounds the vehicle. I would like to add... Is the BMPT an assistant or a trinket?, I believe that this should be exactly the combat unit that would combine reconnaissance and patrol functions, informing crews about sudden changes in the situation and possibly elements of network-centricity.
  57. +1
    12 February 2024 11: 50
    To what was previously written, I would like to add that the fight against FPV drones is becoming a priority task for now within the framework of the "SVO", and then who knows what will happen... Now there are already proven drone detectors and the task is to combine them with an active protection system, especially from the rear hemisphere .

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar people (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned), Kirill Budanov (included to the Rosfinmonitoring list of terrorists and extremists)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev Lev; Ponomarev Ilya; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; Mikhail Kasyanov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"