Military Review

Star of Russian tank construction

163
6 July 1976 was adopted by the Soviet Army T-80. The design of the machine was developed by specialists of the Special Design Bureau of Transport Engineering (St. Petersburg). It was produced including Omsktransmash. Today, both of these enterprises are part of the Uralvagonzavod research and production corporation.


FROM DESIGN TO IMPLEMENTATION

The idea of ​​installing in the engine compartment tank A gas turbine originated in design minds for a long time. In 1948–1949, the Design Bureau of Turbine Production of the Leningrad Kirov Plant (LKZ) was instructed to develop a gas turbine design for a heavy tank. The GTE project was completed with a stationary (non-rotating) heat exchanger. However, the fuel consumption obtained during the calculations was unacceptable, and work on this project was discontinued.

Then various design offices across the country made repeated attempts to develop a gas turbine engine. 16 on April 1968 of the year was issued a decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the USSR Council of Ministers on the creation of gas-turbine power plants for armored vehicles. The purpose and purpose of the work were defined as follows: “... Creation of a tank gas turbine engine with an 1000 hp power. for the T-64A tank in order to improve its dynamic and operational characteristics, as well as to increase combat readiness due to a drastic reduction in the time required to prepare the engine for launch at low ambient temperatures. "

Star of Russian tank construction

The nickname "flying tank" T-80 received deservedly so.

Works on the T-64 tank with the GTSU were headed by Chief Designer of the OKBT (now Spetsmash JSC) Nikolai Sergeevich Popov (Hero of Socialist Labor, Academician of the Academy of Transport of the Russian Federation and St. Petersburg Academy of Engineering, winner of the Lenin and State Prizes), and in the power plant for him - GTD-1000 - chief designer of the Leningrad NPO "Plant them. V.Ya. Klimova (ZIK) Sergey Petrovich Izotov.

NEW "OBJECT"

As a result, under the leadership of N.S. Popova created the “219 SpX1 Object” tank, but during the factory tests of the tank it became clear that a comprehensive solution was needed to a number of issues, including the creation and testing of not only the new transmission and control drives, but also the new running gear. The base tank T-64A does not provide the realization of the increased speed and dynamic capabilities of the tank with the CCD. The new prototype of the tank, in the design of which the new designs for the running gear were embodied, was given the designation “219 SpX2 Object”. His tests confirmed the correctness of the decisions of Leningrad designers.

A qualitative assessment of the work carried out can be judged by statistics figures. So, before adopting the new tank, 118 of various experimental machines were manufactured, which traveled 647 thousand km (16 skirted the equator) and worked 40 thousand hours. During the tests, 150 power plants using 240 gas turbine engines were used. In total, for eight years of work on the creation of a tank with a GTSU, 158 prototypes of tanks were manufactured, of which 31 - with the undercarriage of previously created tanks, the rest - with the original undercarriage with an intermediate roller of intermediate diameter and a track with a rubberized treadmill. During this period, tanks passed all types of tests in the most severe climatic conditions of our country, reaching a total mileage of more than 1 million km.

During the tests, the tank “Object-219” was constantly improved. Sequential elimination of design defects of the base machine, identified by installing the GTE, led to the creation of a new tank.

UNDER T-80

6 July 1976, under the name "T-80" tank with a gas turbine engine GTD-1000T was adopted by the Soviet army.

Immediately after its appearance, the “eighty” became a dream for many foreign military men. Especially T-80U, equipped with an auxiliary power plant, attracted the European military - adherents of the tactics of ambush warfare. A statement by the Minister of Defense of the Syrian Arab Republic, Mustafa Tlas, that he, as a soldier and specialist in such a technique, considers the T-80 "the best tank in the world" was included in the encyclopedia.

“High export demand for Russian equipment is a serious assessment of its quality,” said Nikolai Starovoitov, deputy head of the maintenance and repair department at Omsktransmash, who for many years carried out the service of “eighty” abroad. “For a long time, the T-80 remained one of the most balanced and equipped tanks for combat use.”

"FLYING TANK"

The eight-dozen gas turbine was introduced to the general public in the 90s, when the car began to participate in various equipment shows and international arms exhibitions. The high point of the T-80U, which had just received permission to sell abroad, came in 1993 during the IDEX exhibition in Abu Dhabi. The car perfectly demonstrated fire capabilities and perfectly skated on the tankdrome the most complicated program with overcoming all obstacles. The attempt of the American tankers to repeat on their “Abrams” Block III the success of the Russian military turned out to be a failure: while moving along the embankment with a comb, the “Abrams” jumped off the slope, losing the caterpillar. Following the Russian T-80U to the applause of the audience made a spectacular 14-meter jump from a springboard, than for many years provided himself with the epithet "flying tank".


The T-80U was distinguished by a modernized gun, new fire control and guided weapons, a new engine and other improvements. Photos are provided by Omsktransmash JSC

It is worth noting that the tank chassis was recognized as the most successful for the entire history. Base "vosmidesyatki" served as a contributor to a number of other techniques, clad in armor: recovery vehicle BREM-80U, trencher BTM-4M floating transporter PTS-4, the special fire engine JMP highly secure vehicle "Ladoga", artillery self-propelled guns "Peony" and "Msta-S", an anti-aircraft missile system C-300В.

During its many years of service, the T-80 was repeatedly upgraded, producing various modifications of it: the T-80B (1978) - missile-gun tank; T-80BV - modification with hinged dynamic protection; T 80U (1984) - variant with upgraded gun new complex fire control 1A45 duplicated from the commander, a new set of guided weapons 9K119 with guided missiles on a laser beam, a new engine GTD-1250, Energoagregat GTA 18A, an air intake device of internal dynamic protection and thermal imager, etc. The serial production of these models was carried out by the Omsk Transport Engineering Plant.

The production of T-80 tanks in Russia was discontinued in the second half of the 90-s. After the collapse of the USSR and cuts in the ranks of the Russian army, some of the equipment was freed up. Since a significant part of the tank fleet of the Russian Federation now consists of T-72 type tanks, the country's leadership decided to withdraw T-80 from the troops for storage as a valuable combat resource for a special period.
Author:
Originator:
http://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2016-07-15/7_tanks.html
163 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Professor
    Professor 16 July 2016 06: 40
    +3
    And the statement by the Minister of Defense of the Syrian Arab Republic Mustafa Tlas that he, as a soldier and specialist in similar technology, considers the T-80 “the best tank in the world” was included in the encyclopedia.

    And when did the T-80 appear in Syria? It seems to me there was talking about the T-72.
    1. Alekseev
      Alekseev 16 July 2016 08: 51
      +13
      Quote: Professor
      And when did the T-80 appear in Syria?

      That's right!
      What kind of thing is Syria if these cars were not sent to our Central Asia because of certain problems with the operation of the gas turbine engine in the conditions of heat and heavy dust. And to India then ... yes
      There are materials in the open press.
      In response to laudatory odes, similar to the article, I would like to insert my 5 kopecks on the merits.
      I had to serve on the T-80BV.
      What is this in essence? T-64 with GTE and reinforced chassis.
      Bad car? No, it’s impossible to say so.
      But there are drawbacks, which have already been repeatedly listed, and they were the reason that the T-80 is slowly being withdrawn from the armament of the Republic of Armenia.
      The first is high cost, consumption of gas turbine engine, whimsicality of its exploitation in deserts, mountains.
      MZ T-80, the analogue of the 64th was made in Kharkov.
      It was not without reason that Birch arose and the plans of the Americans to deliver MTU diesel to Abrams.
      The gas turbine engine starts up faster in winter (if the batteries are flawless), but in the summer you can't drive it right away - 1,2 minutes start cycle, which is also not very good. The gas turbine engine can be "fired", it has a smooth torque curve, but in responsiveness it is inferior to a diesel engine of comparable power. Although they write the main fuel of diesel fuel, in difficult conditions, the instruction clearly requires aviation kerosene ... And so on to a fig of nuances.
      1. Verdun
        Verdun 16 July 2016 11: 11
        +49
        Quote: Alekseev
        What kind of thing is Syria if these cars were not sent to our Central Asia because of certain problems with the operation of the gas turbine engine in the conditions of heat and heavy dust. And to India then ..

        Problems with dust on modern gas turbine engines are resolved. Under the USSR, this tank was not delivered abroad, since it was considered more advanced than the T-72 and no one was going to sell it. The Syrian military could well get acquainted with the eighties when they were trained in our BTA. In Central Asia, these tanks had nothing to do. Then there was especially no one to fight with. They were focused on the most responsible area - in Europe. SGV, GSVG, YuGV. They began to deliver them abroad only in the crazy nineties, when they were ready to sell everything and everything.
        I had to serve on the T-80BV.
        What is this in essence? T-64 with GTE and enhanced chassis.
        Such a statement can be heard either from a technically illiterate person, or from someone who was not able to compare these tanks. The differences are more than serious. This is particularly confirmed by the following passage:
        The gas turbine engine starts up faster in winter (if the batteries are flawless), but in the summer you can't drive it right away - 1,2 minutes start cycle, which is also not very good. The gas turbine engine can be "fired", it has a smooth torque curve, but in responsiveness it is inferior to a diesel engine of comparable power.
        In terms of acceleration dynamics, a tank with a gas turbine engine is undoubtedly superior to diesel modifications, and very much moreover. This will be confirmed by anyone who had to actually drive a T-80 with a GTE. At the same time, there can be no talk of any "razkochegarivanie" and "smooth torque curve" on the GTE. The turbine operates at a constant speed, which accounts for the relatively high fuel consumption, and its torque is regulated by the transmission.
        1. 113262a
          113262a 18 July 2016 01: 00
          +3
          Also not true! Nieto does not force to work on manual gas! Moreover, at nominal speed! So, besides the roar of the turbine, no pleasure! Use the pedal, smoothly adding speed, the PCA is just like a clutch when starting. When shifting gears, the PCA automatically turns off the moment on the turbine!
      2. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 16 July 2016 15: 07
        +19
        Quote: Alekseev
        these machines were not sent to our Central Asia either due to certain problems with the operation of the gas turbine engine in the conditions of heat and heavy dust.

        Yemen - 66 T-80, (as of 2013)
        Uzbekistan - about 80 T-80BV, (as of 2016).

      3. zombirusrev
        zombirusrev 16 July 2016 15: 50
        +12
        Don’t bear the measures to protect against dust were taken even at the beginning of the development of the remote control so that he’s okay with that ;-)
      4. Dinko
        Dinko 17 July 2016 15: 31
        +4
        Dear friend, where does the t-64? They even have a hodovka different with 80 coy. I'm not talking about the so-called oposite thrinkler diesel engine mounted on the t-64.
      5. Cynic
        Cynic 17 July 2016 18: 09
        +8
        There is ignorance, and there is illiteracy. Unfortunately, you have demonstrated illiteracy, that is, an unwillingness to know.
        And the fact that you grabbed from the statues about the eighty will be left to them and your conscience as a distributor.
        1. kirpich
          kirpich 18 July 2016 00: 12
          +4
          Yes, I would really get fucked ... if such a byak jumped at me belay
          1. mkpda
            mkpda 21 July 2016 13: 17
            0
            When the T-80 flies at you, it is almost inaudible - a ghost!
        2. BLACK-SHARK-64
          BLACK-SHARK-64 18 July 2016 09: 43
          +2
          handsome ...
        3. innoker-1563
          innoker-1563 18 July 2016 10: 12
          +1
          Class !! Only the music does not roll, "maser-faka" is not ours.
      6. 113262a
        113262a 18 July 2016 00: 53
        +20
        I doubt you served a hundred on the t-80! I served 83-85 in the GSVG, 1 TA, 23 TP, Zeithein. Commander of the combat training t-80b., Omsk. The whole Dresden district is solid sand, the car did not stop, shooting and driving every day! It’s not afraid of sand and dust at all, a self-cleaning filter, vibration cleaning of the blades and dust blowing! For 2 years only once in the winter it did not start, they threw snot and everything happened! The starting current of the starter-generator is scanty compared to the same 64 and 72! The car is audible only at start-up and rebounding, there is a hissing sound on the go, this is not 64, I can hear it for 5 km! The main fuel is TS / RT, but gasoline and diesel fuel substitutes! Pick-up, the tank kicks in place, like a spring, if necessary, you can go 0,5 km / hour! Consumption, yes, but with skillful mechanics, acceptable!
        1. 78bor1973
          78bor1973 18 July 2016 21: 45
          +1
          The phrase about "static HEAT EXCHANGER" is not clear from the article, as far as I know, they are all quite static heat exchangers due to the lack of rotating parts - maybe I missed something ?!
      7. RDX
        RDX 18 July 2016 10: 39
        +2
        The problem of sand pollution has long been solved by self-cleaning turbine blades by vibration, which increased the service life, and the Americans, stupidly put a giant filter
      8. 78bor1973
        78bor1973 18 July 2016 22: 08
        +1
        The tank is excellent, and in the North it is just a fairy tale, when the T-72 crew is blue from the cold on the T-80, and I have never seen anything more complicated about the launch of the T-64 - "I belittle you!"
      9. mkpda
        mkpda 21 July 2016 13: 09
        0
        You, as a professional, should understand what the T-80 did for the professional military, and not for the mobilization army. When I served, it was believed that T-80s could be used 100% by officer crews or crews from overdrafts.
        I mastered only BMPs from military vehicles, but the T-80 left a strong impression on me (they were at the tankodrome at the same time), it’s coming at you, but you don’t hear it - a ghost! And when it passes, a specific whistle from the output device is heard.
    2. 0255
      0255 16 July 2016 11: 09
      +9
      Quote: Professor
      And the statement by the Minister of Defense of the Syrian Arab Republic Mustafa Tlas that he, as a soldier and specialist in similar technology, considers the T-80 “the best tank in the world” was included in the encyclopedia.

      And when did the T-80 appear in Syria? It seems to me there was talking about the T-72.

      Maybe the Syrian minister just liked the T-80 in terms of its characteristics, did Syria want to buy them, but did not buy it for some reason?
      1. Professor
        Professor 16 July 2016 11: 14
        -23%
        Quote: 0255
        Maybe the Syrian minister just liked the T-80 in terms of its characteristics, did Syria want to buy them, but did not buy it for some reason?

        Or maybe you will break his name مصطفى طلاس according to Google and understand that he never said such a thing?
        1. VDV1985
          VDV1985 17 July 2016 18: 39
          +8
          SUCH THE TRUTH - FOR THE BEST TANK IS A MERCAVA !!!
        2. Navigator Basov
          Navigator Basov 18 July 2016 13: 25
          +4
          Quote: Professor
          Or maybe you will break his name مصطفى طلاس according to Google and understand that he never said such a thing?
          He said this to the Spiegel correspondent, in which his name would not have been written in Arabic. Now, the citizen is crap (with which I congratulate): http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-13510972.html
          1. Professor
            Professor 18 July 2016 15: 40
            +1
            Quote: Bass Navigator
            Quote: Professor
            Or maybe you will break his name مصطفى طلاس according to Google and understand that he never said such a thing?
            He said this to the Spiegel correspondent, in which his name would not have been written in Arabic. Now, the citizen is crap (with which I congratulate): http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-13510972.html

            Thanks for the link. I enjoyed reading it a lot. I especially liked about Arafat. lol In this interview, he has 2 of the best tanks in the world. laughing

            10.09.1984
            SPIEGEL: In his address on the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in June 1982, President Assad called on the Syrian forces to "fight courageously, despite the overwhelming superiority of Israeli aircraft." Does Israel still have a significant military advantage?
            TLAS: No, not in airplanes, not in tanks, not even in weapons. We have the best tanks in the world ...

            SPIEGEL: Better than Israeli Merkava tanks?
            TLAS: I laugh at the Merkava. If our T-72s struck at the Merkavs, they would burn like cardboard. Until now, no one has provided evidence that the T-72s were hit by Merkava tanks. The Israelis hit them only with air-to-surface missiles. They fell into reserve fuel tanks and the fire was transferred to the engine. The armor of the T-72 was not damaged. In total, in 1982, seven T-72s were hit, but now they have long been repaired and ready for use.
            .......

            SPIEGEL: How would a former tank commander not prefer the German Leopard 2 to Tlas, which the Saudis are so eager for?
            TLAS: I still have not seen Leopard 2, but I would like to try it. However, we are not interested in getting the Leopard 2 at any price. The new Soviet T-80 and Leo 2 are not only equal, but the T-80 even surpasses Leo 2, even according to Western observers. The Soviets have already produced several thousand T-80s.

            SPIEGEL: Even for Syria?
            TLAS: No, not yet, but when we need it, we will receive them. The T-80 is Moscow’s response to the Leopard 2. In my opinion, as a soldier and a specialist in T-80 tanks, the best tank in the world. But, of course, Leopard cannot be underestimated. 2 It is the best tank in the West - better than the French AMX-30, the British Challenger and the American M-1 Abrams. For this reason alone, I would look at Leo 2 with pleasure one day.

            SPIEGEL: Perhaps we will even arrange an exchange when you have the T-80.
            TLAS: I do not mind. But seriously: If we could set up a licensed production of Leo 2 with its gorgeous smooth-bore 120 mm gun, that would be just great. We could definitely organize a joint Syrian-German production. Then the Federal Republic would no longer have to ship Leopard directly to Saudi Arabia. We would do that. However, Germany would be freed from this political problem.
          2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Simple
      Simple 16 July 2016 14: 00
      +16
      Quote: Professor
      And when did the T-80 appear in Syria?

      Do you think that for "the statement of the Minister of Defense of the Syrian Arab Republic Mustafa Tlas that he, as a soldier and a specialist in such equipment, considers the T-80" the best tank in the world ", the appearance of the T-80 in Syria is necessary?
      - Mustafa was a traveling Syrian or disabled?
      - Mustafa was banned from entering the USSR, SVD, Russia?
      and m / y by the way:
      Yemen = 66 T-80, as of 2013 year

      -Pakistan = 320 T-80UD, as of 2013 year
      -In 1997, transactions were concluded for the supply of 34 T-80У and 20 military transport helicopters Mi-17-1В and several Mi-172 (http://tass.ru/info/744961) to Egypt, SIPRI claims that they didn’t, but still the Egyptians got to know each other before signing up.
      Mohamed could try in these countries
      Mustafa Tlas:
      “The Soviet T-80 is Moscow’s response to the Leopard-2.” It is not only equal to the German machine, but also significantly superior to it. As a soldier and tank specialist, I consider the T-80 the best tank in the world. ”
      http://army.lv/ru/t-80/istorija/631/15 пишет:
      T-80U acquired China, Syria, South Korea, Cyprus (according to some reports, North Korea also bought a few dozen at the beginning of the 90's)

      I don’t understand Arabic, the video has been deleted



      نسف دبابة أسدية T80 بالكامل ... "

      T-80?

      the exhaust system, the rollers are not visible, the sound isn’t understand request
      and triplex like 3?
      1. Professor
        Professor 16 July 2016 14: 09
        -20%
        Quote: Just
        Do you think that for "the statement of the Minister of Defense of the Syrian Arab Republic Mustafa Tlas that he, as a soldier and a specialist in such equipment, considers the T-80" the best tank in the world ", the appearance of the T-80 in Syria is necessary?

        1. Did he evaluate the tank in absentia as "as a soldier and a specialist in such equipment"?
        2. Shoveled the Internet, but never found his statement that "entered the encyclopedia." Maybe you met him in any encyclopedia? wink

        Quote: Just
        - Mustafa was a traveling Syrian or disabled?
        - Mustafa was banned from entering the USSR, SVD, Russia?

        That is, the Arab minister praises the tank did not fight for the Arabs? I believe. lol


        Quote: Just
        I don’t understand Arabic, the video has been deleted

        And I understand the trochki. No there T-80.

        Quote: Just
        T-80?

        Yah? wink
        1. Simple
          Simple 16 July 2016 16: 03
          +12
          Quote: Professor
          Did he evaluate the tank in absentia as "as a soldier and a specialist in such equipment"?

          1. Why is it "in absentia"?
          Quote: Just
          Mohamed could try in these countries

          Quote: Just
          the Egyptians got to know each other before signing up.

          (and he served in Egypt (when they were together, and was in prison)
          2. Well, Mustafa Tlas definitely "rode" tanks
          Quote: Professor
          ". Maybe you met him in any encyclopedia?

          maybe you are looking for hebrew?
          in Russian here:
          https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2-80 в конце
          link to
          Soviet T-80 - Moscow's response to the Leopard-2. It is not only equal to the German machine, but also significantly superior to it. As a soldier and tank specialist, I consider the T-80 the best tank in the world.

          - Vladimir Ilyin. Main tank T-80 [47]
          http://armor.kiev.ua/Tanks/Modern/T80/T80.php
          In the Arabic language
          والدبابات إلى أخصائي ، وأعتقد أن T-80 أفضل دبابة في العالم "
          like here
          http://www.arabic-military.com/t340-topic
          (don't understand)
          http://aviation-arab.net/showthread.php?t=3618&page=3
          http://defense-arab.com/vb/threads/60022/
          Quote: Professor
          That is, the Arab minister praises the tank did not fight for the Arabs? I believe

          1.Yemen-there are not Arabs? Is fighting
          2. The Israelites praise F-35 for not fighting for the Jews. So what?
          I believe too
          Quote: Professor
          And I understand the trochki. No there T-80.

          نسف دبابة أسدية T80 بالكامل ... "
          Yah? They broadcast something about him
          Quote: Professor
          Yah?

          my opinion is similar.
          1. Professor
            Professor 16 July 2016 16: 31
            -19%
            Quote: Just
            Muhamed could in these countries and try

            He could generally take part in the development of the tank.

            Quote: Just
            (and he served in Egypt (when they were together, and was in prison)

            Only then did the T-80 not smell.

            Quote: Just
            in Russian here:

            Progress on the face:
            When Defense Minister of the Syrian Arab Republic Mustafa Glas, who led the Syrian army in Lebanon in 1981-82, a correspondent for Spiegel magazine asked: “The former Glas tank driver would like to have the German Leopard 2, which Saudi Arabia is so eager to get. ? ", the minister replied:" .... I do not strive to have it at any cost. The Soviet T-80 is Moscow's answer to the Leopard 2. It is not only equal to the German vehicle, but also significantly surpasses it. As a soldier and tank specialist , I think the T-80 is the best tank in the world. "
            Now it remains only to find an article in Spiegel. Thank goodness German is good.

            Quote: Just
            like here

            I looked at the "brotherly" Arab sites. Nothing about the use of the T-80 in Syria and nothing about the statements of the gallant general.

            Quote: Just

            1.Yemen-there are not Arabs? Is fighting
            2. The Israelites praise F-35 for not fighting for the Jews. So what?

            1. The Syrian general will never praise a Yemeni tank.
            2. He could not test this tank in 1998 in Yemen.
            3. Not a single Israeli general called the F-35 the best in the world, and this despite the fact that the Israelis managed to fly around the F-35.

            Quote: Just
            نسف دبابة أسدية T80 بالكامل ... "
            Yah? They broadcast something about him

            It’s also written on the fence, but firewood is known there.

            Quote: Just
            my opinion is similar.

            IMXO T-64

            PS
            The search engine in Shigel gives the following results about the general.
            http://www.spiegel.de/suche/index.html?suchbegriff=Mustafa+Tlass
            There is no such interview there. request
            1. Arameev
              Arameev 18 July 2016 14: 52
              +1
              Quote: Professor
              ". [/ i]
              Now it remains only to find an article in Spiegel. Thank goodness German is good.
              PS
              The search engine in Shigel gives the following results about the general.
              http://www.spiegel.de/suche/index.html?suchbegriff=Mustafa+Tlass
              There is no such interview there. request

              shalom "professor" and all those present. in the same place, the link above was given ...
              //www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-13510972.html
              Or are there reasonable suspicions that the link is left?
              1. Professor
                Professor 18 July 2016 19: 52
                -2
                Quote: Arameev
                Or are there reasonable suspicions that the link is left?

                The link is not left. He gave such an interview. I admit my mistake. The general is left. Read his interview, laugh. For example, he claims that Israel did not return Taba to Egypt, and that he has all the best Syrian weapons in the world.
                1. alexej123
                  alexej123 18 July 2016 23: 43
                  +2
                  Oleg, as always, are true to themselves. "No, the link is not left, but the general is plagued by vague doubts." So no one from the members of the forum says that he is the best in the world, they say Excellent car, that's all.
                  1. Professor
                    Professor 19 July 2016 08: 21
                    +3
                    Did I say that the car is bad? I am jarred by the "best in the world."
      2. Amnestied
        Amnestied 17 July 2016 13: 24
        +1
        Quote: Just
        the exhaust system, the rollers are not visible, the sound isn’t understand
        and triplex like 3?

        t72 definitely!
    4. Warrior-80
      Warrior-80 16 July 2016 14: 03
      +1
      T-80 is not needed, it is a cold war tank, a breakthrough tank. In modern conditions, the speed of the tank is not important. And in Syria, where to apply its qualities, maneuverability and speed, there are fierce battles where the main defense
      1. The stranger
        The stranger 17 July 2016 01: 26
        +8
        What a breakthrough? This is a tank of the North.
        You can’t even stiffen the -60 diesel engine in half an hour. Meanwhile, the flight time of missiles is 20 minutes.
        And this turbine works right away, and all the shelves scatter normally.
        1. 113262a
          113262a 18 July 2016 01: 05
          +2
          Tank north t-10! There were no 80 in the north! But almost all GSVG were on them!
          1. The stranger
            The stranger 19 July 2016 00: 35
            0
            So in the north there wasn’t much. A T-10 diesel, with the ensuing.
      2. Alf
        Alf 17 July 2016 18: 52
        +3
        Quote: Warrior-80
        T-80 is not needed, it is a cold war tank, a breakthrough tank. In modern conditions, the speed of the tank is not important.

        It is precisely in modern warfare that mobility is important.
    5. tundra
      tundra 16 July 2016 15: 27
      +2
      Quote: Professor
      It seems to me there was talking about the T-72.

      About him. It was about 72 that he was talking about.
    6. 113262a
      113262a 18 July 2016 01: 39
      +2
      In 83 in Elani, they were preparing us for Syria! There were already their sportsmen frolicking, they were officially preparing us! Then it did not grow together, flew to the Nazi comrades!
  2. izya top
    izya top 16 July 2016 06: 40
    +24
    ---------------------------------------
    1. sabakina
      sabakina 16 July 2016 09: 18
      +10
      To be honest, I'm shocked. On a decent course, "forward", the mechanic drive cuts in the "back" ... And goes ...
      1. Mother CheeseEarth
        Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 17: 25
        +5
        Quote: sabakina
        On a decent course, "forward", the mechanic drive cuts in the "back" ... And goes ...

        And why not go, there on the slurry "hook" is initially practically zero, both in motion and in the opposite direction, there is a slipping, in general, without much difference for the transmission.
        1. stur
          stur 17 July 2016 16: 19
          0
          yes there is solid ice - hell he would drift so summer
          1. The stranger
            The stranger 19 July 2016 02: 22
            0
            :))) Plus for you, for laughs :)
            This is not a chisel. Tractor drift in its own way :)
            And they also know how to stand on the rear rollers, like motorcycles on the rear wheel, or ride on the front rollers, face down, like a bear in a circus on a bicycle. They can also screw themselves into the ground, almost at the speed of a mole. Know how to twist your ass in one direction and your head in the other, ad infinitum. Then suddenly change directions. Some are able to lay down like a cat killed by a son, a pancake, and on command face! In three seconds make a stance like a hound, and spit out fire like the Gorynich Snake. Doing the same pirouettes on everything solid that I called "drift".
            What is true is true: in a swamp they cannot do this :)
            But thanks for the joke! :)
  3. Hammer
    Hammer 16 July 2016 06: 50
    -67%
    Star of Russian tank construction

    if you replace the first word with a well-known mat rhyming to it, it will already be more like the truth. Judging by the reviews of the military who fought on these tanks
    1. rumatam
      rumatam 16 July 2016 08: 07
      +19
      what side to these tanks? Or a scary sofa expert?
      1. 0255
        0255 16 July 2016 11: 11
        +32
        Quote: rumatam
        what side to these tanks? Or a scary sofa expert?

        He doesn’t bend the T-80 in Armored Warfare laughing
    2. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 16 July 2016 11: 48
      +20
      As far as is known, the t-80 is the absolute champion in sustained hits of cumulative warheads:
      . Tank T-80BV from the composition of 133 Guards. during the battles in Grozny, he received 18 hits from an RPG and 1 detonation on a land mine. Having repeatedly been repaired and replaced by 4 crews, the tank, after damage to the barrel, ended the battles in Grozny as a tractor.
    3. Nehist
      Nehist 16 July 2016 23: 30
      +3
      Well to drive the transmission is not tricky! As expressed the battalion commander OTB -How do these dol .... I’ll put them at the helm! Sorry for the car! It needs skill, by the way, it was transplanted from the T-55. So imagine the level of training of mechanical water. For that, my company (graduated from Chelyabenskoye) wrote such pretzels on it.
    4. The stranger
      The stranger 17 July 2016 03: 00
      +3
      You won’t believe it, but all the military who fought speak very poorly about all weapons, about the war, and about life - aye.
      Especially victorious, because it is difficult for the defeated to speak from the grave. And they would say ...
      1. Hammer
        Hammer 17 July 2016 12: 15
        -13%
        And you, a pack of couches, calculate the consumption of a stupid turbine, its cost, efficiency, reliability. Plus, the cost of the T-80 itself, almost three T-72s, taking into account absolutely no superior performance over the latter. Read the memoirs of the military who fought on them, read, as children like to say, "materiel" about the peculiarities of exploitation. Add to this the wild howl of the generals, who prayed after Chechnya that there would be no more gas turbine tanks in the army and, accordingly, there would be no tracks rolled on the asphalt. Well, finish with some kind of Greek tender. Draw conclusions, and then argue, and do not rush with stupid "not nagging tans" negative
        1. The stranger
          The stranger 17 July 2016 13: 17
          +7
          Well, then the divan divorced, and you see - an effective manager, right? Since something is more expensive than something else - to ban. And what to do with the real need for this other, which is more expensive?
          Here is the ZIL-157 and ZIL-131. 131 is one and a half times more expensive than 157, and he is structurally the same Cleaver, only humanized, so that ordinary people and even women can ride on it. Because of this, he is one and a half tons heavier, and he never goes compared to an ordinary Kolun, but they were still released together, right up to 85 °. By stupidity?
          Or the Urals, which can be distinguished from Zil from far away from Zil - 131, and which is six times more expensive than it. But compared with it, all the other three-wheeled - five-axle - upright parquet junk. So to declare its creators and exploiters embezzlers and fools, or to value and use its capabilities highly?
          The T-80 was clearly designed as a niche machine. Why and why I ended up in other places, I can’t know, the assumptions are what everyone has: they wanted to check how it was there, that maybe there was nothing else, this, and so on, would come down to the rear. Or all of this together. In connection with his return to the Arctic, he may be resurrected. Anyway, I have not heard anything about breakthrough Arctic diesels, or other engines.
          1. Hammer
            Hammer 18 July 2016 16: 13
            -1
            all this is a stupid theory wrapped in a stupid philosophy. I am somehow more for reality. Of course, the T-80 ride is as soft as a Mercedes, of course you do not need to stoke the boilers at night. Of course, this is all wonderful for tankers, of course they will love him for it. And of course they are not soared that our poor state does not export it. What is the characteristics of it is not much higher than the T-72. And that the T-80U and M1A1 were both released in 1985 .. although, it’s better not to say anything about it, and some especially ardent patriots will go blind. Of course, a good car, a complicated intricate experiment, well done, thought, well done, but to say that the army needs it .. I want to know why? Think and answer. Cons put brains are not particularly needed smile
            1. The stranger
              The stranger 19 July 2016 00: 50
              0
              Well, because of its innate dullness, it’s hard for me to communicate with brilliant sledgehammer minds, but I dare to assume that it was, and will be needed, because of its unique properties arising from the engine. And which cannot be replaced in any way, by the way, in a typical situation, such as actions that are adequate in speed in northern latitudes.
  4. kugelblitz
    kugelblitz 16 July 2016 07: 53
    +22
    My relative served as a mechanic in such a vehicle, and now I have been transferred to the T-72B3. According to him, the T-80 allowed to move many times faster from point to point on the dirt road and off-road. If earlier they arrived at a conditional point earlier than BMP-2 and managed to smoke well, now it is the other way around. Running T-72, he said, is tough and the tank is worse at higher speeds, while the T-80 flew like a bird. Unfortunately, the tanks were taken away for storage.
    1. The stranger
      The stranger 19 July 2016 02: 00
      +1
      Expected. In a high-speed rally car, the suspension and propulsion system should in any case be better than that of a collective farm hard worker. Its only advantage is the price. Well, and mass, with the consequent possible repairs. And so - the upper class - it is the upper one.
      We didn't have a BMP-2, we had a little BMP-1. Then they replaced the Shipka BMP-23 with their own. There were a lot of BTR-60PB, a foreign car :), and even more MTLB, fortunately they did it themselves. Here on them, and then on the BMP, and cut circles around the T-55 on the march. And in 82, if sclerosis does not change, he collided with a T-72. So they gave us the heat and asked, in terms of speed. Fierce tanks. And since they say that 80 is better, then I can only envy. Maybe someday I'll see it live.
  5. egsp
    egsp 16 July 2016 07: 57
    +13
    According to information received in personal communication with the tankers of the OL LenVO in the second half of the 90s and by what I saw, the tank is simply gorgeous.
    1. Pushkar77
      Pushkar77 16 July 2016 13: 08
      +13
      I agree with you, with whom I spoke (who served on the T-80), I did not hear a single bad word from them, the car is cool, it will be a big mistake to remove them from service, at our northern latitudes.
      1. Nehist
        Nehist 16 July 2016 23: 36
        +8
        6 years have been waiting for 80 to come to our division. Come !!! The tank for the fitness repair just served in ORVB is gorgeous, just a modular replacement of the units. On the Far East, he showed himself perfectly!
  6. family tree
    family tree 16 July 2016 08: 04
    +12
    In the north, there are no alternatives to gas turbine engine launch in the cold request
  7. rumatam
    rumatam 16 July 2016 08: 11
    +16
    Everything is simple, Omsktransmash went bankrupt, N. Tagil lobbied his own and the T80 was not needed, although in many respects it is better. And there is PR Tankograd and so on.
    1. Kostya Andreev
      Kostya Andreev 16 July 2016 08: 26
      +1
      too shy to ask. When did lobbyists lobby you? or gossip, another.
      I will not argue which car is better, because it had very little to do with tanks (although some couch experts did not deal with them at all, and they compare the superiority of some over others according to the tables).
      I would like to listen to people who are in the subject.
      I know that 80, compared to 72 is complicated and expensive. and on this basis, in spite of its advantages (and the pros and cons of a gas turbine engine have been described more than once on VO), it is not advisable to have two of the same type of tank with similar tanks, especially armed with an armata. and it’s not cheap either.
      1. Dimon19661
        Dimon19661 16 July 2016 08: 44
        +11
        As far as I know, the tank was designed to be at the forefront of an attack in a military conflict with NATO-speed, weapons, the absolute omnivorous power plant.
      2. Serg koma
        Serg koma 17 July 2016 21: 07
        +6
        Quote: Kostya Andreev
        When did lobbyists lobby you? or gossip, another.

        I talked with the ZOR test engineer (now OZTM). In his words, and not to believe him, not to respect yourself, that's how EVERYTHING was. Termination of production, bankruptcy of the plant - the merit of Yeltsyn (I hope you know a brief biography of him), it was not without the participation of the "governor" Polezhaev, who by hook or by crook squeezed power (and territory) from the plant, taking them out for "noble" purposes for unpromising PROJECTS FOR FURTHER PRIVATIZATION.
        PS You can consider this "gossip" if you find it difficult to analyze the situation in the 90s in the defense industry.
      3. 113262a
        113262a 18 July 2016 01: 33
        +2
        Suo 80 and 72 at the time of the end of the production of eighties and did not stand next! Back in the 80s on Cobra and ATGM was, and target tracking, and a crosswind sensor and calculator! At 72, it all appeared with 2000 todes! Consumer goods are consumer goods!
    2. Forest
      Forest 16 July 2016 10: 44
      +3
      Our country is not as rich as the USSR, in order to simultaneously produce 3 type MBT and 2 type medium tanks. And to alter UVZ to the production of T-80 - it is easier to build a new plant.
      1. family tree
        family tree 16 July 2016 14: 59
        +3
        Quote: Forest
        And alter UVZ

        And do not alter, a small series for the north, on the basis of the same t-14, and then, as long as you warm the oil and the antifreeze, at minus forty, to crank the crankshaft, they’ll kill a hundred times what
        1. Forest
          Forest 17 July 2016 15: 14
          0
          In the North, tanks are not likely to be needed at all, since NATO’s Arctic units do not even have armored personnel carriers.
          1. The stranger
            The stranger 17 July 2016 15: 43
            +4
            Yes damn it, who are generally worried about the NATO Arctic units, which, as they did not exist, are not. You just lead these divisions to the west through the North, alive, while everyone is swarming in the middle zone under the blown up dams among the herds of artillery, stand in a beautiful arc in northern Europe, and lazily ask "So, sick, stop raging, or should I go down to Lisbon and Rome ? ". When everyone else will have nothing, from the word at all.
            1. Forest
              Forest 18 July 2016 15: 36
              0
              We do not have 69 thousand tanks to scare NATO with them. And even more so, make a thousand-kilometer hook across the Arctic, transferring tens of thousands of people and pieces of equipment.
              1. The stranger
                The stranger 19 July 2016 01: 29
                0
                And where do you do it? :)))
                Through the slaughter in central Europe? Through bombed and littered passes in the Balkans and the Alps? Through the former railways tied into knots, like on barbed wire? Through collapsed bridges from 100 meters or more on highways? Through river valleys, dams over which are blown up? When in three days of non-nuclear war, in Europe EVERYTHING non-amphibian will not be on track? Just look at the hydrological map of Europe.
                Why do you think that even a cheap but raid T-72 was made 200 hours of motor resources, and tracks from the western border to Lamansh? In order not to carry thousands of cars of new tracks after them and the rest in detail, in the middle of the road. So that they really could run all these thousands of miles.
                Why did our T-55s and 62s melt down, and why is it funny when someone praises leopard abramsics?
                1. Forest
                  Forest 19 July 2016 15: 57
                  0
                  1) Why go to the Balkans if you need to go to the Atlantic? The same story about the Alps. Plus, to destroy the main European passes, you need to use a minimum of nuclear weapons, this is for you in the Himalayas.
                  2) No one will blow up the dam, and if it does, then the tanks and infantry fighting vehicles will calmly pass after the main stream has passed.
                  3) After three days, only cross-border battles will end. To expand the army is not to pick your nose.
                  4) T-72 is not cheap, it is simple, but it was more expensive than T-64. What is the relationship between rivers and running 72-ki I don’t understand at all, the tank is not floating.
                  5) Why are T-55 and T-62 needed now? To ruin their people? BMPs now have more serious weapons and armor protection is thicker than these tanks, which they began to develop back in the 43. And there is no danger for Leo and Abramsov, for whom gun penetration is higher than 900 mm and frontal booking from 650 mm from BOPS, this junk does not represent.
      2. Come on
        Come on 17 July 2016 16: 14
        +3
        Quote: Forest
        And to alter UVZ to the production of T-80 - it is easier to build a new plant


        Oh really? And what is it necessary to "change" there? Moreover, why a new plant? Heavy cranes and teams of mechanics, welders, etc. Especially when it comes to "revitalizing" and modernizing a couple of thousands of T-80s stored, from which it would be possible to make not a weak armored fist from 1000-2000 tanks, modernized to a certain level. 100 of these tanks can be used for crew training, the rest can be wrapped in a closet. Otherwise, what happens now, all these T-80s are stored, but why the heck? How many crews with T-80 experience can be recruited? And in 10 years?
        1. Serg koma
          Serg koma 17 July 2016 21: 15
          +2
          Quote: Yeah, well.
          about the "revitalization" and modernization of a couple of thousands of T-80s stored, from which one could make not a weak armored fist from 1000-2000 tanks,

          GSVG, more than two thousand tanks, after being withdrawn, they were first torn apart (starting from contacts from precious metals to aluminum), then they were cut as scrap.
          WHERE EXIST "EMPLOYEES"- safety is a big question.
        2. Forest
          Forest 18 July 2016 15: 34
          0
          Revive whom? T-80 will not be upgraded or returned to units. If you search, 34s are stored, but nobody will use them in battle.
    3. the most important
      the most important 16 July 2016 22: 19
      +5
      Quote: rumatam
      Everything is simple, Omsktransmash went bankrupt,

      More precisely, they robbed .... they took everything out in echelons in an unknown direction ... A terrible sight - trees sprouted through cars and through engines on cars ...
  8. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 16 July 2016 10: 20
    +9
    Not one, even the richest country in the world, can not afford to have several MBT of different types. USSR - could! A modernized version of the T 80 has been developed, possibly correct and good. All the same, there are many such machines in storage, and the new control system STRONGLY saves fuel. Their running gear is good. I wish that development did not disappear.
    1. Professor
      Professor 16 July 2016 10: 37
      -29%
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      USSR - could!

      "Could" and "smog" are different things.
      1. Dimon19661
        Dimon19661 16 July 2016 12: 35
        +4
        Believe me, the USSR-smog.
    2. spravochnik
      spravochnik 16 July 2016 16: 33
      +2
      What's the problem? There was a diesel version of the t-80ud. Produce one type in different versions, depending on the place of application.
      1. Come on
        Come on 17 July 2016 16: 25
        +1
        Quote: spravochnik
        What's the problem?


        And whose diesel on UD? lol
    3. Mother CheeseEarth
      Mother CheeseEarth 16 July 2016 17: 43
      -2
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      Not one, even the richest country in the world, can afford to have several MBT of different types

      Who exactly told you this?
      I will upset you, but with any kind of mass production of equipment, there is no difference at all for the cost price, one or two types of MBT are in service, the development itself costs "a penny" against the background of the cost of all samples.
      Even more, if you calculate how much the United States spent on developing promising weapons, then there probably would be enough for a couple of dozen types of MBT.
      Here the reason, most likely, is the misunderstanding (or rather, probably, the disagreement) of the Soviet generals in what type of MBT the army needs (well, or maybe the factory lobby).
      And as a result of this extra haemorrhage for subsequent logistics.
  9. Aleks76
    Aleks76 16 July 2016 11: 00
    +3
    The birthplace of GTD-1000TF, GTD-1250 is "KADVI" (Kaluga engine). Unfortunately, the plant is currently in a deplorable state.
  10. cost 75
    cost 75 16 July 2016 11: 17
    +3
    Omsk transmash is also barely breathing. And the tank is excellent.
    1. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 16 July 2016 20: 21
      +1
      Quote: kos 75
      Omsk transmash is also barely breathing. And the tank is excellent.

      It is part of the UVZ corporation, as are the Petersburgers (T-80 developers).
      1. cost 75
        cost 75 17 July 2016 07: 07
        +1
        To enter then he enters only the remnants from the master's table get him
    2. Serg koma
      Serg koma 17 July 2016 21: 21
      +1
      Quote: kos 75
      Omsk transmash

      This is a REBORNER (floor with a new sign) from OJSC KBTM, the true OZTM (aka "ZOR", he is "factory number 174") has long gone bankrupt, sawn down and stolen ...
  11. Verdun
    Verdun 16 July 2016 11: 24
    +12
    During the emergency, which he served in the Special Forces, during the SHIELD exercises, I had the opportunity to observe a curious picture. I stood at the post, and in a hollow below me, about two kilometers away, there was a training counter tank battle of eighty. The spectacle was such that the directors of commercials could die of envy. There was everything - rapid movement, and jumping, and smoke screens ... At that time, the park was renewed and the T-72 in the SGV were replaced by the T-80. And even then he had the opportunity to talk with tankers who unanimously claimed that the T-80 was a more advanced tank. In my opinion, it would be good if these machines, even those that are in storage, were modernized and returned to service.
    1. Nehist
      Nehist 16 July 2016 23: 41
      +2
      In the Far East, these are linear machines that are fully operational.
      1. Dinko
        Dinko 17 July 2016 15: 44
        +1
        The first time I saw in Komsomolsk-on-Amur in 90, on the basis of a reserve of tanks, 16 brand new T-80s as a reserve of the okrug. The only problem for the first time was the low-quality gas turbine production of the Kharkov plant, which, without really working, often failed and had to be changed.
  12. FLATERCOOL
    FLATERCOOL 16 July 2016 12: 19
    -29%
    this tank was for the most part a mistake
    1. proud
      proud 16 July 2016 23: 54
      +8
      Your birth to this World was really a Big mistake!
    2. Dinko
      Dinko 17 July 2016 15: 36
      +3
      probably you had to ask permission to create t-80 or not
  13. flanker7
    flanker7 16 July 2016 12: 28
    +16
    Had to serve on 80BV, a beautiful and extremely reliable car!
    Running gear, engine, OMS, everything at that time was advanced.
    Every year on Tank Day I come and see my 80th ....
    Oh, nostalgia!
  14. svp67
    svp67 16 July 2016 12: 33
    +12
    It looks like someone wants to revive the management's interest in the T-80, but for this all it is necessary that he be brought to the "tank biathlon", along with other tanks. I must say right away, it will be a cool SIGHT.
    1. Kenneth
      Kenneth 16 July 2016 12: 50
      -11%
      Put a team of Ukrainians on it.
      1. cth; fyn
        cth; fyn 16 July 2016 21: 01
        +2
        Duc, they have not yet had time to climb up the armature!
    2. proud
      proud 16 July 2016 23: 57
      +2
      After that spectacle, the presence of t72b3 will lose all meaning
  15. Kostya Andreev
    Kostya Andreev 16 July 2016 12: 40
    +6
    Quote: FLATERCOOL
    this tank was for the most part a mistake


    and how can you motivate your words?

    many of those present here want t-72, and t-90, and t-80, and armature, and that would be a lot.
    this will not happen, the economy will bend.
  16. Kenneth
    Kenneth 16 July 2016 12: 48
    -20%
    I have only two questions. What could be more stupid than jumping on a heavy machine worth millions of dollars, especially since damage is inevitable and practical sense is completely absent. And why do we need two parallel lines of tanks. To create hell for logisticians or is it a way to cut the loot invented by the Communists.
    1. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 16 July 2016 13: 15
      +6
      The ability to jump and continue to complete the task speaks of the strength and reliability of the machine, then it jumps mainly at shows.
      1. Forest
        Forest 16 July 2016 14: 32
        -12%
        Any tank except T-64 last modifications can jump. Only we arrange a circus out of this, which in a real situation is not only unnecessary, but the running gear ruins and shakes the system.
        1. cth; fyn
          cth; fyn 16 July 2016 16: 02
          +12
          You fly on a tank across the battlefield, a bunch of alahakbar with grenade launchers are aiming at you, a bunch of foreign instructors are unsuccessfully trying to capture your tank in the javelin sight, and then bam and you have a bump in front of you, such a good meter, you are like this:
          - Oh no, I’ll ditch the running gear and I’ll blast the systems.
          Slow down, and you hear a signal about laser irradiation, joyful Alahbabahs shout their Allah Akbar and shoot right away from a couple of dozen RPG-7s, and the Javelin is also flying up.
          1. Forest
            Forest 16 July 2016 17: 56
            +1
            Nobody flies across the battlefield, this is not a tankodrome for you, the gunner-commander needs to search and defeat the target, and even Leo 30A35 with its jewelry stabilization is not capable of speeds above 2-7 km / h. Often, tanks attack at speeds of 10-20 km / h, and when they are covered by infantry, then generally the speed decreases to 2-3. If you find yourself alone in a heap of grenade launchers and ATGMs, nothing will save. In Iraq, turntables were shot down from RPGs, and they will have maneuverability and speed higher than the 45-70 ton of fools. And, I repeat, ANY tank can perform a jump, except for the T-64. But nowhere do they boast of it. And you can’t get away from the 3 generation ATGM with such leaps - there the speed of hitting the target is much higher than any that the tank can give out. And be that as it may - the suspension is crashed strongly, the OMS may go astray.
            1. Awaz
              Awaz 16 July 2016 19: 24
              +3
              Well, as far as I know, one of the foreigners was trying to jump. If I’m not mistaken, they ditched the fur of the water. Anyone can jump, another thing is whether the crew will survive on landing ...
              1. Bad_gr
                Bad_gr 16 July 2016 20: 30
                +6
                Quote: Forest
                Any tank can jump, except for the T-64 last modifications ....

                Nobody argues, once any tank can jump.
                Another question, the T-80 on its suspension jumped all the time allotted to the exhibition. That is, at the moment, the possibilities of its suspension are beyond competition.

                Quote: AwaZ
                Well, as far as I know, one of the foreigners was trying to jump.

                Abrams. The driver injured his back.
                1. Come on
                  Come on 17 July 2016 16: 59
                  +2
                  Here are the jumping leopards.



                  Here leopards in combat order rush along the intersection and jump when necessary. At what it is not a show, but a necessary measure to maintain high speed.

                  1. Bad_gr
                    Bad_gr 17 July 2016 17: 36
                    +2
                    In the second film (in the 4th minute with copecks), not the German Leopard rides, but the French Leclerc.
                    In the first, the Leopard jumps from a half-meter springboard and lands quite softly. But this does not compare with ours:

                    1. Come on
                      Come on 18 July 2016 06: 52
                      -2
                      Only in this case, not one jump for the show, but along the entire path. It is not clear at all what some want to prove by demonstrative leaps, when even without them enough damage to the chassis occurs. And to believe in such stupid things that they say that if Leo2 and A1M2 are not doing indicative jumps, then because the cars will fall apart, the kindergarten, especially when you take into account the quality of German / American production, and even more important is the safety factor of the running load on the load, which these machines differ from the same T-72/80.
            2. cth; fyn
              cth; fyn 16 July 2016 20: 54
              +4
              Okay, a little background, you ran out of shells and you break out of the environment. You don’t need to shoot as you see, all hope for speed and maneuverability, and for the survivability of the machine, is a very real and quite possible situation.
            3. Pavel1
              Pavel1 16 July 2016 22: 31
              0
              Quote: Forest
              And, I repeat, ANY tank can perform a jump, except for the T-64.

              can show how abram jumps?
              1. Alf
                Alf 16 July 2016 22: 39
                +6
                Quote: Paul1
                can show how abram jumps?
              2. Forest
                Forest 17 July 2016 15: 11
                -1
                Quote: Paul1
                Quote: Forest
                And, I repeat, ANY tank can perform a jump, except for the T-64.

                can show how abram jumps?

                No questions
                1. Pavel1
                  Pavel1 17 July 2016 22: 11
                  0
                  Quote: Forest
                  No questions


                  unanswered mean questions?
                  1. Forest
                    Forest 18 July 2016 15: 37
                    0
                    Photo posted, what are the problems? If not enough, keep the landing Abrams.
            4. The stranger
              The stranger 17 July 2016 03: 43
              +6
              Listen, darago, you weren’t quite happy here, right? Ne maskwitch? I look ...
              What are you carrying the blizzard, and with performance characteristics. Yes, with claims to analysis. You just go beyond the Moscow Ring Road, ask someone to take a thread on the Niva along the dirt road. Ask for 20 km / h. And then I’ll tell you about jumping, and how it doesn’t happen. Why doesn’t it happen, how to avoid them, other wisdom ...
              Make friends - go back to the sandbox.

              And for you personally, I repeat: any tank can NOT jump. The springboard can throw any tank, yes. Only after landing, you will have to change the carrier, and on trifles - the rest who were inside. For compression fractures of the spines. Himself fucking jumped on MTLB, not sickly so, from the slope. Lucky that at speed, and fell exactly, but on arable land. Young naggers, "come on, think ..." The car continued to move as if nothing had happened, but in fact everyone was shell-shocked, though not to the point of disability. But over the next few days, everyone ended up in the infirmary.
              So that jumps were in the regular capabilities of the machine - it must be designed and made NOT like everyone else. And what is more understandable to you - not only just like everyone else.
        2. spravochnik
          spravochnik 16 July 2016 16: 44
          +4
          The combat situation will require jumping like a hare.
          1. The stranger
            The stranger 17 July 2016 04: 11
            +3
            And it will not only require combat. This is only in the rally at the navigator's road book, where all the pits and jumps are registered, and there only the best manage to pass the route without taking the wheels off the road. And here is an unfamiliar road, and even it is not visible because of dust - blizzards - smoke, and in a hurry. So, and during the day of the march, the water drivers lose 5 kilograms of live weight. And okay, there, reconnaissance of sappers and traffic controllers can and will have time to slip in advance, and place restrictions. And what if the battle is in an unfamiliar and invisible area? So it turns out that tanks need to be able to jump. Only here is what the designers and factories managed to give their army. Or did not have time.
            1. Serg koma
              Serg koma 17 July 2016 21: 42
              +1
              Quote: Alien
              So it turns out that tanks need to be able to jump
              : drinks:
              "A guy from our city" (film: year:, 1942) "OUR tanks will jump across rivers".: year:: year:: year: -
    2. spravochnik
      spravochnik 16 July 2016 16: 40
      -1
      And in the states, under capitalism, you have to understand, they are saving. I just read an article about how they do it. USSR and Russia have a rest.
    3. Verdun
      Verdun 16 July 2016 18: 43
      +5
      Quote: Kenneth
      What could be more stupid than jumping on a heavy machine worth millions of dollars, especially since damage is inevitable and practical sense is completely absent.

      The ability to quickly move to the battlefield has not harmed anyone. The battlefield is a little like an autobahn. There are holes and bumps. To overcome them quickly, you need to have a solid chassis and LMS, able to withstand strong shocks. Jumping domestic tanks demonstrate the reliability of their chassis and SLA. These our machines compare favorably with their foreign counterparts.
      And why do we need two parallel lines of tanks. To create hell for logisticians or is it a way to cut the loot invented by the Communists.
      Initially, it was clear that the T-80 is an expensive car, but it has a number of significant advantages over the T-72. That's just the T-72 has already been adopted, mass production has been deployed. Then it was decided to release it and supply the guards. Soviet military doctrine regarded the T-80 as a more expensive attack tank, and the T-72 as a cheaper and more massive reserve tank. As for logistics, a large number of different equipment was produced and adopted at the T-80 units, since its chassis is much more advanced than the T-72 and has a large reserve of weight load. For example, the self-propelled guns Pion to place on the chassis, created on the T-72 units simply did not work.
    4. Nehist
      Nehist 16 July 2016 23: 45
      +2
      And what are the difficulties for Logistics? 80 omnivorous, BP exactly the same as on the t-72, t-90. The only thing you need is the level of preparation of the mechanical water.
      1. The stranger
        The stranger 17 July 2016 04: 20
        +1
        Do you have a car? Where are you fixing?
        Does the yard uncle Vasya always have all the spare parts in the garage? All tools for all makes and models? And does he know all the adjustment data for all of them? And on a branded service, is the warehouse and staff the size of Uncle Vasya’s garage?
      2. bolat19640303
        bolat19640303 17 July 2016 07: 01
        +5
        Quote: Nehist
        And what are the difficulties for Logistics? 80 omnivorous, BP exactly the same as on the t-72, t-90. The only thing you need is the level of preparation of the mechanical water.



        As for logistics and omnivorous gas turbine engines, all the same, the main fuel of the Republic of Tatarstan, the reserve TS-1, can work out a limited number of hours on gasolines and diesel fuel, if the memory serves, no more than 50 hours.
        The level of training of m / in ob. 219 is no higher than the level of m / in ob. 172, 434, etc. GTE is even easier to operate than diesel.
        I had a chance to study the T-80,64 (OVTIU), serve the T-80BV (SGV). There is something to compare (T-72 BVI). Still, for me, there is no better T-80 car.
  17. eleronn
    eleronn 16 July 2016 13: 01
    +2
    "it was decided to withdraw the T-80 from the troops for storage ..." - this is tantamount to killing the T-80 as a tank. In a few years, they can be scrapped as the combat value of these vehicles will tend to zero.
    1. Kenneth
      Kenneth 16 July 2016 13: 18
      -2
      Their combat value is already not high, since the T80 fleet has not been modernized for a long time. True, there were rumors ...
  18. iouris
    iouris 16 July 2016 13: 18
    0
    The tank had to start quickly and quickly "fly" to the Channel. And that's all.
    By the way, the gas turbine engine was developed by the Leningrad Design Bureau of Klimov and, based on Ustinov’s proposal, an engine for the MiG-29 was created.
    1. 113262a
      113262a 18 July 2016 01: 13
      +1
      No, for Buran!
  19. Warrior-80
    Warrior-80 16 July 2016 14: 19
    0
    In modern combat conditions, the speed of the tank is not the main thing, this is evidenced by the world history of tank building, light tanks became extinct as a class, the main thing is protection and firepower. We stepped on this rake at the beginning of the great Patriotic war, where the backbone was light and high-speed tanks, the Germans also came to the same opinion and began to produce more than medium and heavy tanks by 42 g, unlike European offensive companies
    1. spravochnik
      spravochnik 16 July 2016 16: 48
      +4
      Ideally, there should be everything, and speed, and security, and firepower. The T-80 was such an ideal.
    2. Alf
      Alf 16 July 2016 20: 56
      +2
      Quote: Warrior-80
      this is evidenced by the world history of tank building, light tanks became extinct as a class, the main thing is security and firepower.

      During World War II, light tanks as a class did not die out at all. It simply came a simple understanding that throwing light tanks into an attack is an indescribable stupidity. The lot of light reconnaissance tanks and they coped with this task perfectly.
      And light tanks left after 2MV only because their tasks began to be performed by a new class of combat vehicles-BMPs that appeared.
      1. Verdun
        Verdun 17 July 2016 11: 02
        +1
        Quote: Alf
        And light tanks left after 2MV only because their tasks began to be performed by a new class of combat vehicles-BMPs that appeared.

        Why did someone decide that light tanks left at all? They are in the armies of many countries. In Russia - Sprut-SD, Swedish CV90120-T, Polish LC-08 Anders ...
        1. Alf
          Alf 17 July 2016 23: 00
          0
          Quote: Verdun
          In Russia - Octopus-SD

          2С25 "Octopus-SD" (GABTU index - object 952) - Russian airborne self-propelled anti-tank gun. It was developed in the design bureau of the Volgograd Tractor Plant and Yekaterinburg OKB-9 under the scientific supervision of the Klimov Central Scientific Research Institute of Precision Engineering (TsNIITochMash). The main designer of the chassis is A.V. Shabalin, 125-mm guns 2A75 - V.I. Nasedkin. SAU 2S25 "Octopus-SD" is designed to fight tanks and other armored vehicles and manpower of the enemy as part of the airborne troops, marines and special forces.

          An octopus is more likely an anti-tank self-propelled gun than a light tank. Although in modern classifications the devil will break his leg.
  20. Lyubopyatov
    Lyubopyatov 16 July 2016 14: 41
    0
    Restore Omsktransmash and Kaluga Engine! Want!
  21. ML-334
    ML-334 16 July 2016 15: 24
    +1
    Somewhere in the 86th, the guys from Lining drove to study, talked about a gas turbine tank, the speed is awesome but warms up, there are no problems with a diesel engine.
    1. Alf
      Alf 16 July 2016 20: 59
      +4
      Quote: ML-334
      the speed is fucking hot but there is no problem with a diesel engine.

      In general, the story with SVT is repeated - those who had hands growing from where needed and sharpened by what was needed, as well as a head that was understanding, praised her very much. And for those who could not boast of it, the mosquito was a miracle weapon.
      1. Nehist
        Nehist 16 July 2016 23: 53
        +1
        I completely agree with your comment. It is in the hands of the matter
    2. The stranger
      The stranger 17 July 2016 04: 42
      +2
      And you drive the diesel in revolutions, or in fuel starvation, and admire the thermometer. Stay impressed.
      Everything can be overheated, frozen, broken. And you can not.
    3. 113262a
      113262a 18 July 2016 01: 15
      +1
      There is nothing to bask there!
  22. bionik
    bionik 16 July 2016 16: 18
    +5
    If anyone is interested: Igor Vechkanov (captain, room 8 tr 3 tb 6 guards. TP, attached 81 guards. SME, tank T-80BV No. 180) - New Year's merry-go-round (memories of the initial stage of the storming of Grozny).artofwar.ru/w/wechkanow_i_w/viv.shtmlFrom the author: Dedicated to the guardsmen tankers 3 tank battalions, 6 guards tank regiments, 90 guards tank divisions. With courage, courage and honor, fulfilled his duty. Many at the cost of their own lives ...
  23. sviazist
    sviazist 16 July 2016 22: 28
    +2
    80 cool car. She was ahead of time. And when her finest hour was to be, the country that created it collapsed. Russia does not need it (dear, some production technologies have been lost along with people who left in the 90s and early 00s without leaving students). And now without modernization, it is becoming hopelessly obsolete. In a word, a legend.
    1. Cat
      Cat 17 July 2016 20: 55
      0
      Tower equipment T90 and T80 are essentially interchangeable. The distinction in the automatic loader is not essential. You can upgrade the old and new cast. The most important thing in the 80 is the engine and transmission, and their resource must be protected.
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 17 July 2016 21: 16
        0
        Quote: Kotischa
        Tower equipment T90 and T80 are essentially interchangeable.

        Not certainly in that way. The sizes of the towers are different. As a rule, the same enterprises made the filling for all tanks of the USSR, but the adaptation of this equipment to a specific product is the problem of the enterprise producing this equipment.
        Although
        The same T-64 armor was developed at the Steel Research Institute.
        The same electronics of all tanks was developed in Russia at the same enterprise (I repeat, for all tanks manufactured in the USSR)
  24. proud
    proud 17 July 2016 00: 20
    +4
    There is simply no competitor to this legend in the Urals and in the Arctic, and in general it seems to me that this world simply did not know a more graceful tank than the T-80U! A friend of mine at the end of the zero served on the t-80 BV and before that on the 72-ke it was saying that it was simply impossible to compare these machines — Mercedes and Lada! Many years have passed and the guy still remembers with warmth: I would give a lot for something to start up and drive a couple of kilometers. The one who created it was really a genius!
  25. Dinko
    Dinko 17 July 2016 15: 34
    +1
    T-80U is a great car and let all kinds of experts not be smart about it
  26. Cynic
    Cynic 17 July 2016 18: 14
    +1
    There is talk on the network about the T-80U modernization program
  27. Cat
    Cat 17 July 2016 20: 44
    -2
    Findings. T80 is an expensive tank, in the production of gas turbine engines it is about 8-10 times more expensive than diesel, it is uneconomical in operation, it consumes 15 times more fuel than T72, repair a turbine is difficult to repair in the field, and diesel with a sledgehammer and such a mother has a chance .
    Thus, the T80 tank is expensive, maneuverable and, in fact, needs a professional army. Perhaps in the Russian army an analogue of the T80 will appear but later, when we will be a bit richer. Moreover, the author described the story well as the T64 with its small engine compartment installed a gas turbine engine, if we can’t install it on the armature. And now the question is Omsk, do you have a modern gas-turbine engine for a tank of 2000 l / s? No! Ahead of the dawn for a meeting - work gentlemen.
    1. Alf
      Alf 17 July 2016 23: 04
      0
      Quote: Kotischa
      Thus, the T80 tank is expensive, maneuverable and, in fact, needs a professional army. Perhaps in the Russian army an analogue of the T80 will appear but later, when we will be a bit richer.

      Why wait if he is now? Maybe just worth it to upgrade?
      1. Katman
        Katman 18 July 2016 17: 22
        0
        Duck is the same DEAR! Therefore, it is needed!
    2. 113262a
      113262a 18 July 2016 01: 18
      +1
      And why in the 15th let’s already 30 times! Mileage at a full gas station-500 km! Few?
  28. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 17 July 2016 21: 25
    0
    I don’t understand one thing in our tank building:
    Development-well, did the T-64/80/72 tested-good. But why take into service Three different tanks of the same generation? Though kill, I do not understand. One gun, automatic loader two different; everything else is generally different in three versions. Steeper than us, only China, there in general the devil will break his leg.
    Take Germany: Leo1 (contemporary T-54/55/62), Leo 2 (T-64/72/80), and almost now in the modification of Leo2A7 it is almost T-90 and T-90MS.
    1. 113262a
      113262a 18 July 2016 01: 26
      +2
      At the time of the start of production, the t-80 simply did not have an engine of acceptable power! The Kharkov copy of YuMO is small-series, the 5 cylinder gave out 850 forces, the Chelyabinsk 12 cylinders - and 650 did not give out! Hence the GTD-1000TF! By designation, the 80th tank of a breakthrough, 64- for the South Ossetian Army, the Greeks and Italians to frighten, 72- for blacks and domestic use! This is a general outline!
      1. Cat
        Cat 18 July 2016 05: 37
        -1
        There is still no gas turbine engine for a modern tank. The designers are still feeding the army with 1500 l / s "projectiles". Although it is necessary to develop an engine with a capacity of 1700-2000 l / s.
        1. Andrey77
          Andrey77 20 July 2016 11: 49
          0
          No ships! Now something is stirring up in Kolomna, God forbid, do it.
      2. Andrey77
        Andrey77 20 July 2016 11: 48
        0
        All right. Therefore, they accepted - how it will turn out in the world, we must take into account all the options.
  29. The stranger
    The stranger 18 July 2016 00: 31
    0
    Quote: VDV1985
    SUCH THE TRUTH - FOR THE BEST TANK IS A MERCAVA !!!


    I am laughing. Even young children know that the best compote is from strawberries.
  30. Cat
    Cat 18 July 2016 05: 39
    0
    What is the point of laughing at the state of BTT, if you want to cry. Only from the knees began to rise.
  31. gaura
    gaura 18 July 2016 07: 13
    0
    Why are these scribbling? All our tanks except Armata were actually used in hostilities, unlike the Leopards themselves. So maybe veterans of Chechnya on the basis of combat experience will evaluate the car, and not according to the tables, etc.? Vidosiki with galloping tanks is fun and lively, but there was already such a series of BTs that rode well and turned out to be completely unsuitable for war
    1. Andrey77
      Andrey77 20 July 2016 11: 28
      0
      With proper protection, ALL tanks are effective. Just on the T-80 is a multi-fuel gas turbine engine, and on the T-72/90 a simple diesel engine. In the context of the exercises it makes no difference, and when the team went on a breakthrough, the GTE immediately wins. You can pour everything that burns into it from the nearest gas station or jet fuel storage.
  32. Katman
    Katman 18 July 2016 17: 18
    0
    Someone can explain to me why the T-80 is being discussed? Out of production! What are the advantages, what are the performance characteristics? I suspect that some LLC "SuperTank" with a capital of 5, I'm lying, 10 thousand rubles decided to fish again in muddy water. The topic is closed for me.
    1. The stranger
      The stranger 19 July 2016 02: 50
      0
      Because people are commenting on an article about the T-80.
      Why is the article written? Because the author wanted to write about the T-80.
      Why was it published? Because the editors accepted it.
      Why is the topic closed to you?
      Because you are a short-sighted person.

      Lord Below, I apologize to normal readers for the format of the post. By golly, it turned out by itself, I couldn’t.
    2. Andrey77
      Andrey77 20 July 2016 11: 37
      0
      The author is nostalgic for the times when thousands of tanks rush to Europe. And here the GTE unconditionally wins. But in the event of a positional war, a gas turbine engine is more expensive to service and it is not needed. In other words, if we, as Germans, in 1941 wage a dashing maneuvering war, a gas turbine engine is needed. If we are not going to conquer Europe - a waste of money.
      1. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr 20 July 2016 12: 22
        0
        Quote: Andrey77
        But in the event of a positional war, a gas turbine engine is more expensive to service and it is not needed.

        For your information, the T-80U has an APU (auxiliary power unit), and if the tank is in position, it saves the life of the main engine, it also consumes less fuel than the main engine of the T-72 and T-90 (the APU does not have )


        1. Andrey77
          Andrey77 21 July 2016 11: 07
          0
          And how did she take root in the troops? She even at Abramsah, with a factory warranty, did not take root. In theory, everything is beautiful, but in practice they launch the main engine.
  33. mkpda
    mkpda 21 July 2016 14: 17
    0
    We forgot to mention the most important thing - 40 years of adopting the T-80!
  34. Fidel
    Fidel 28 July 2016 23: 32
    0
    This is not a tank. IS A SONG!
    I had the luck to serve on this miracle of engineering.
    My was a modification of the T-80U. Turbine 1250 horses! With a mass of 42 tons.
    Fairy tale!
    Forget about 80 km. in hour! In fact, mechanical waterways accelerated it to 110! On the ground 90!
    This is not a tank. It's a dream! The thunderclap of the first all-devastating blow embodied in armor, breaking through EVERYTHING!
    Yes Channel! drinks
  35. Sailor
    Sailor 18 October 2016 21: 30
    +1
    As I wrote before, in my opinion this is the best tank in the Russian Federation (not counting Almaty, of course)!