Why it was decided to resume production of the T-80 “jet tank”

40

One of the most curious News recent domestic military-industrial complex information is information about the resumption of serial production of the T-80 tank, equipped not with a diesel, but with a gas turbine power plant. Why do the troops have this armored vehicle and should we seriously expect the second coming of the “Black Eagle”?

Return


The general director of the Uralvagonzavod concern, Alexander Potapov, announced on air on the Zvezda TV channel that the production of the “jet tank”, which has shown itself well in the northwestern military zone, will be resumed in Russia:



Such a task is worth it, at least the military has set it for us. And we are now actively interacting, working, and exploring these issues with the Ministry of Industry and Trade, because this requires, accordingly, new capacities.

Let us recall that it was the T-80 type, and specifically the T-80BVM, that included the famous Alyosha tank, which emerged victorious from an unequal confrontation with the Ukrainian armored group. In addition to skill and battle luck, the high speed and maneuverability of the Soviet tank helped its heroic crew survive and defeat it. It would seem that take and rivet the T-80 on an industrial scale, making them a “weapon of victory”, like the legendary T-34 in the Great Patriotic War. However, everything is somewhat more complicated than it seems at first glance.

There are only two countries in the world that are armed with both tanks with diesel engines and gas turbine engines - the USA and the Russian Federation as the legal successor of the USSR. During their aggression against Iraq, the Americans had a lot of trouble servicing Abrams gas turbine units in desert conditions. The main battle tanks in the Russian troops today are the T-90 and T-72 of various modifications, equipped with diesel engines. And rightly so, since they are much simpler and cheaper to manufacture and subsequently maintain than the T-80 with their gas turbine power plants. The latter are almost ideal for use in harsh arctic conditions.

The question arises, then why resume serial production of the T-80 if there were something like 3000 tanks of this type in storage before the start of the SVO?

Predestination


Note that, despite all the above nuances, some time ago we predicted return of armored vehicles of this type. The requirements for the tank, generated by the conditions of the SVO, were as follows:

At first, equipped with secure digital communications so that the tank crew can coordinate their actions with the infantry without the risk of being heard by the enemy. Unfortunately, the greatest losses among Russian armored vehicles were due to precisely this problem, when at the first stage of the special operation there were not enough well-trained infantry to cover the tanks and they became a convenient target for the Ukrainian military, armed with American Javelin ATGMs.

Secondly, we need a powerful gas turbine unit that provides the T-80 with “reactivity”, allows it to actively maneuver and quickly change its firing position.

Thirdly, instead of a 125 mm caliber gun, you need a heavy-duty 152 mm caliber one. As we have established in previous publications, in conditions of trench warfare, lightly armored self-propelled guns of 122 mm caliber are uncompetitive and have low survivability. Therefore, in the Northern Military District zone, we simply have to use tanks instead of self-propelled guns. The much shorter range and accuracy of destruction, coupled with a weaker high-explosive fragmentation projectile, is compensated by more powerful tank armor, which gives the crew a chance to survive if an enemy projectile of 152 mm or 155 mm caliber arrives in response.

So, what has already come true?

First of all, I would like to note the activities of our volunteer organizations, which, in cooperation with the military, developed the Sotnik-BL product, adapting the Chinese civilian digital radio station Lira DM-1000 for use in tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and other armored vehicles for communication with infantry. In fact, we are now hastily repeating the path that the Ukrainian Armed Forces have already taken since 2015, when after Debaltsevo they raised the question of the need to digitalize armored vehicle communications. The enemy has already accomplished this task; in Russia they are trying to quickly solve it at various levels, from grassroots to official.

The decision to resume production of the T-80 is obviously forced. This war will be long and difficult, it is necessary to compensate for losses in armored vehicles and send new ones to the front to saturate the warring army with them. Yes, our main tanks are diesel T-72 and T-90 in various modifications, but it is not possible to sharply increase their production volumes, since there are capacity limitations and many related enterprises are involved in the process. Apparently, it turned out to be easier to transfer the status of the Omsktransmash enterprise from repair to tank building. The most interesting thing is whether the predictions about equipping the “jet tank” with a 152 mm gun will come true.

Let us recall that in the 90s in Omsk, on the basis of a modernized version of the T-80U, the Black Eagle tank was developed, which was equipped with a heavy-duty 152-mm gun. It did not go into production, but “Object 640” was remembered by many, and it was remembered during the Northern Military District, when a “shell famine” arose and a request for an ultra-large tank caliber for the reasons mentioned above. We even wondered if a special operation could give second chance for "Black Eagle"?

Indeed, a 152 caliber gun with a long barrel can be used by a tank as an ersatz self-propelled gun for firing from closed positions. In a version with a shortened barrel, such a tank can be used for assault operations in urban battles. In this form, the “Black Eagle” or its modern iteration could find itself in the SVO zone to solve special problems, existing in parallel with the main combat T-72 and T-90.

Will the T-80 be equipped with a 152 mm gun? We'll find out soon.
40 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -9
    11 September 2023 11: 57
    Why it was decided to resume production of the T-80 “jet tank”

    So, diesel fuel is now golden, but kerosene is dark - there’s no point in flying. And now, waking up someone to steam kerosene.
    1. +8
      11 September 2023 12: 56
      Forgive me, but I haven’t read a more stupid idea lately - to resume the production of a tank in order to sell kerosene....
    2. -1
      12 September 2023 03: 35
      Don't worry, my dear! We have plenty of everything that would steadily and steadily contribute to the replenishment of the “heavenly hundred”, both kerosene and something to fly on...
    3. +3
      12 September 2023 14: 09
      The T-80 gas turbine unit is multi-fuel, the consumption is 1.5-1.8 (approximately) times higher than that of a diesel machine with similar performance characteristics.
    4. The comment was deleted.
  2. +3
    11 September 2023 12: 24
    We need to cram into it not 152 mm, but 203. With such a weapon and on jet propulsion, we will fly to the Bug without even noticing.
    1. +2
      12 September 2023 17: 39
      Where are you going to cram 80 mm into the T-203 tank?
  3. +8
    11 September 2023 12: 30
    if there were something like 3000 tanks of this type in storage before the start of the SVO?

    Thanks to the communists, they made so many weapons. We must use what is already there. Everything else is a budget cut, if it's not electronics and UAVs. We will experiment after the victory!
  4. +6
    11 September 2023 13: 29
    Why it was decided to resume production of the T-80 “jet tank”

    The author did not disclose the topic. For example, I am concerned about where the new gas turbine engines will come from (their production also needs to be expanded), additional fire control systems, how we are going to solve the problem of unification, and least of all - whether it will be possible to fit a 152 mm gun into a standard turret.
    1. +3
      11 September 2023 15: 01
      They wrote on VO, though without specifics, that gas turbine engines are produced, in theory they should be produced if there are so many in storage.
    2. +4
      11 September 2023 17: 18
      At one time they took a helicopter gas turbine engine and modernized it into a tank. I haven’t heard that there are problems with the production of helicopter gas turbine engines. Even under the communists, a 152 mm cannon was stuck on the T-80, you just need to start releasing it. I once trained on the T-80 and T-72. This is the same as Mercedes and Zhiguli. Already in 1982, the T-80 had a commander's cupola with an anti-aircraft machine gun. which was controlled by the commander from the tank without opening the hatch. The ballistic computer automated all calculations (barrel wear, type of ammunition, ambient temperature and barrel deflection, side wind, own speed and the speed of the enemy and at what angle it is moving) and there was a laser range finder that automatically reset the range to the ballistic computer. That's exactly why the T-80 was removed from service! We bought who we need and it's in the bag!
      1. 0
        12 September 2023 17: 37
        This is exactly why the T-80 was removed from service! We bought who we needed and it was all done!

        With one line, they ruined your entire comment. Make 3 thousand pieces and suddenly they bought someone! We wish we could do that now. Still, your brains are in the wrong place. You have to drink, though!
    3. +1
      11 September 2023 18: 13
      It doesn’t matter where you get the components from, it’s important to get funding to launch production, and then, “then soup with the cat”... No one has yet been punished for thwarting the dreams of Russians
    4. -7
      11 September 2023 19: 29
      New gas turbine engines are not installed on tanks, but used ones are installed from helicopters
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. 0
        13 September 2023 20: 15
        Again this 1155, a connoisseur of everything, an opponent of the Ivian carriers and a sectarian of Fedorov.

        The T-80s are not powered and are taken from storage and capitalized. From old T-80s.
    5. 0
      12 September 2023 03: 39
      There is no need to “pull” such questions into your bright head. This is all solvable...
  5. +6
    11 September 2023 13: 35
    To solve the problems of self-propelled guns, it is necessary to make self-propelled guns. Analogue of SU-152 WWII. Easier and cheaper. It's just a little late, but it can be solved. And the tank was made against the tank. It is complicated and expensive.
    True, now the situation is such that it is necessary not to construct, but to pull out and restore what is there. The rest is fantasy.
    1. +1
      11 September 2023 16: 03
      Tank battles are minimal and are no longer envisaged in the future. Anti-tank guided missiles, "Lancet" or "Krasnopol" are better against a tank, especially the latest helicopter weapons - more effective and cheaper. According to the new T-80, it needs to be updated comprehensively, with the experience of the air defense system. Acceleration response, given current requirements, is not the latest in performance characteristics. Created for urban and close combat with a short 152 mm howitzer - after all, this is a tank for being on the front line. For long distances, it’s better to make the Coalition with an active-reactive guided projectile.
    2. +5
      12 September 2023 14: 33
      The tank is ORIGINALLY a means of supporting infantry in the attack! The tank is the “fire and caterpillars” of the offensive!

      The tank was made against the tank

      this is your fantasy))), the tank was and is being made as a countermeasure to enemy weapons threatening attacking/defending units, the tank is present directly in the front line of attack and defense - this is its main difference from self-propelled guns. Self-propelled guns need to be made, they are cheaper, but this is not a first-line weapon, but a means of supporting offensive/defensive actions.
  6. Owl
    +6
    11 September 2023 14: 03
    They will take the T-80 from storage, gut it, change the filling (control and aiming systems, communications equipment), improve security, sort out (restore or replace) the gas turbine engine - and the new machine is ready.
    1. +2
      11 September 2023 15: 05
      What Omsktransmash is doing now, the result is BVM, according to the head of Uralvagonzavod, we are talking about production from scratch.
    2. +3
      12 September 2023 10: 05
      Quote: Eagle Owl
      They will take the T-80 from storage, gut it, change the filling (control and aiming systems, communications equipment), improve security, sort out (restore or replace) the gas turbine engine - and the new machine is ready.

      I'm more interested, will they install active protection or will it be expensive?
      1. +1
        12 September 2023 14: 55
        The T-80BVM became the first tank with the Relikt remote sensing system adopted by the Russian Armed Forces.


        T-80BVMs were sent from Omsktransmash on September 30.09.2023, XNUMX to the Russian Defense Ministry, as you can see - the Relikt remote control system is present.

  7. 0
    11 September 2023 15: 28
    Yes, if there was a prototype with a 152 mm cannon, then it would be advisable to repeat it in the new version of the T-80. This is real progress if it is possible to use Krasnopol.
    1. +1
      11 September 2023 18: 16
      What gun 152??? They can’t finish off the coalition, why 152 if ATGMs are more reliable at hitting armored vehicles?!?! There will be another analogue by 2035?!
      1. +1
        12 September 2023 03: 43
        "Analognet" were good at parades. Now the situation is different - they will finish it!
      2. 0
        12 September 2023 07: 25
        Damn dHug, oh, I’m belittling you and what do you think, just like you had to tell me “they can’t finish it,” so we can, or excuse me, we can. I DON’T KNOW how to say it correctly, SAWGERS, you and I have more than enough. They are like TERMITES, only this is what they think about from morning to evening.
  8. +1
    11 September 2023 18: 44
    The T80 is a normal tank and in the Arctic it is indispensable thanks to the gas turbine engine, but this is specific to climatic conditions. But why? In place of continuing to improve the T90M/72 and unify the tank fleet, funds and production capacity are being scattered??? It’s not clear, and somehow it raises questions: did some “patriot” decide to make a big buck?
    1. 0
      4 October 2023 16: 45
      The Jet runs much better in the clean artic air and doesn't require constant filter and air intake filter cleaning, unfortunately, the same can't be said about it in areas of prone to airborne dirt and sand particles. The M1 has the same issues, in the Desert storms, the filters needed to be cleaned every 70 miles..............that's a huge maintenance and logistical headache in the middle of battle.
  9. 0
    11 September 2023 19: 39
    the main difference between the t8o and the t72-90 is the gas turbine engine, it is obvious that it is quite possible to resume their production in the black eagle modification or with the filling from the t90, for obvious reasons, stupid Americans went wrong with the gas turbine engine on tanks in the desert, where did they get sick?? however, Ukraine is not a dusty country and the T80 can easily fight there, and even more so in the north.. the respected author confuses Tanks and self-propelled guns, they have different tasks, and the use of the T55 T62 self-propelled guns is a temporary forced measure, in the future we need mainly 203 mm self-propelled guns , but increasing the caliber (and weight) of a tank is not always good, although it may be possible to go from 125 to 155, I don’t know much about tanks, but it seems to me that all its tasks except the tasks of self-propelled guns can be solved with a 125 caliber, especially since there are ammunition and a single standard, it should be nimble and light, and the self-propelled gun artillery should be 203 mm and long-range
    1. +1
      11 September 2023 20: 24
      Quote: vladimir1155
      the main difference between T8o and T72-90 is the gas turbine engine,

      Not only ! The T-72 and T-90 are equipped with an automatic loader (AZ); and on the T-80...the loading mechanism (MZ)! And escho...the location of the gun on the T-80 is somewhat different than on the T-72 and the loading is on a different side...I’m doing this from memory(!)...I don’t remember the details anymore!
  10. +1
    11 September 2023 20: 33
    Well, history repeats itself again! Back to the Future again! It’s too early...too early to forget the assault self-propelled guns of the self-propelled gun (SU) type from the Second World War based on tanks! There are prototypes of the T-80 tank with a 152 mm tank gun! It is not at all necessary to “build” on the basis of a prototype MBT! Maybe it’s better to “play tricks” with an assault self-propelled gun? And include not tank units, but self-propelled artillery units!
  11. 0
    11 September 2023 21: 41
    Secondly, we need a powerful gas turbine unit, which provides the T-80 with “reactivity”, allows it to actively maneuver and quickly change its firing position.

    What's not to like about the existing one? KADVI has not gone away, there will be no problems with turbines.
    https://kadvi.ru/product_category/gas_enginee/
    We need to make 2000 hp. - No problem.
    https://kadvi.ru/product/gdt-1250/

    The decision to resume production of the T-80 is obviously forced.

    Forced in only one sense, all sorts of conflicts await Russia ahead. Including in the Arctic. And there the gas turbine engine is beyond competition.
  12. 0
    11 September 2023 23: 04
    Quote: Old Oleg
    Forgive me, but I haven’t read a more stupid idea lately - to resume the production of a tank in order to sell kerosene....

    Those who know... Know.
  13. +2
    12 September 2023 02: 15
    Either a tank, or a self-propelled gun, or 125mm, or 152, or a long gun, or a sawn-off shotgun, or because digital communication is needed, but karma prohibits installing it on the T-72/90))) although 100 % is not karma but the absence of this very connection in reality)))
    And the decision to renew is just another nonsense PR from the crap vertical of power and the Ministry of Defense, which are trying to kill the stench with loud but empty statements and raise their reputation from the bottom, after a system of protection against drones that has no analogues in the world))) in the form of old tires, who are just asking for a napalm container to be dropped on them)
    But there is no production and there will not be) Because the T-80 has nothing in common with the T-90, which means no one produces anything for it, and since there is no production of spare parts, components and assemblies, then there are no specialists, and the old ones are already either retired or in graves. Recently it turned out that the T72B3 was forced to be downgraded in terms of sights, because they are stupidly NOT ENOUGH, Sosny-U cannot increase the production volume for some reason, and it only goes on the T-90. What then are they going to install on 80s?
  14. +1
    12 September 2023 10: 04
    It makes sense to re-produce the T-80 with a 152 mm gun. Otherwise, it is easier to revive the 3000 T-80s that are in storage.
  15. 0
    12 September 2023 13: 35
    A full scale drone war is coming soon. Will there be a place for crewed aircraft and tanks in this war? It’s time to organize drone troops of different specializations by analogy with troops with living personnel. Aircraft drones are more effective than ground drones, the same tanks with artificial intelligence. The time has come to form armies of combat robots and drones. All living things that inappropriately take part in the battle must be removed to the control rooms and underground battle control points. Crew combat vehicles, T-90, T-72, T-80, as well as Su-34, Su-25, Tu-22, Tu 160 will soon fall into oblivion. It's time to change the vector of our military industry towards combat vehicles without crew equipment. Whoever switches the industry to unmanned combat vehicles first is the future. There is one interesting point in this revolutionary replacement of means of warfare - these are weapons with electromagnetic pulse (EMP) generators, including atomic, neutron and EMP pulses. It will instantly turn all efforts to create armies of robots into a pile of unnecessary hardware. If L.S. can be protected from both neutron and EMP pulses, then the digital controller boards of modern combat control equipment are unlikely.
  16. 0
    12 September 2023 17: 50
    Will the T-80 be equipped with a 152 mm gun?

    It will not.
  17. 0
    13 September 2023 20: 12
    But there was still no secure connection, judging by the case with Alyosha. They did not know who was opposing them in that battle.
  18. 0
    15 September 2023 00: 29
    Quote: Always Russian
    Don't worry, my dear! We have plenty of everything that would steadily and steadily contribute to the replenishment of the “heavenly hundred”, both kerosene and something to fly on...

    Oh well. It was not for nothing that Chubais became an illegal immigrant.
  19. 0
    4 October 2023 16: 40
    Interesting article...