How it all began?
The domestic T-80U first saw the light of day in 1976, and in 1980 the Americans made their own Abrams.
Until now, only Russia and the United States are armed with tanks with a gas turbine power plant. Ukraine is not taken into account, because only T-80UD, a diesel version of the famous “eighty”, is in service there. And it all began in 1932, when a design bureau belonging to the Kirov plant was organized in the USSR. It was in its depths that the idea of creating a fundamentally new tank, equipped with a gas turbine power plant, was born. It was this decision that determined what type of fuel for the T-80U tank would be used in the future: regular diesel or kerosene.
The famous designer Zh. Ya. Kotin, who worked on the layout of the formidable ISs, at one time thought about creating even more powerful and better armed machines. Why did he turn his attention to the gas turbine engine? The fact is that he planned to create a tank weighing in the range of 55-60 tons, for normal mobility which required a motor with a power of at least 1000 hp. With. In those years, one could only dream of such diesel engines. That is why the idea arose of introducing aviation and shipbuilding technologies (that is, gas turbine engines) into tank building.
Already in 1955, work began, two promising models were created. But then it turned out that the engineers of the Kirov plant, who had previously only created engines for ships, did not fully understand the technological task. The work was curtailed and then stopped altogether, since N.S. Khrushchev completely “ruined” all the development of heavy tanks. So at that time, the T-80U tank, whose engine was unique in its own way, was not destined to appear.
However, there is no point in indiscriminately blaming Nikita Sergeevich in this case: in parallel with him, promising diesel engines were also demonstrated, against the background of which the frankly crude gas turbine engine looked very unpromising. But what can we say, if this engine was able to “register” on production tanks only in the 80s of the last century, and even today many military personnel do not have the most rosy attitude towards such power plants. It should be noted that there are quite objective reasons for this.
MILITARY REVIEW AND POLITICS
INTRODUCTION
Usually when tanks are described, they talk about engine power, armor thickness, and fuel reserves. And the most important thing is the distance at which a tank gun can hit an enemy tank. This is of course important, but not as much as some imagine. And the reasons for making this or that decision are not always those that were written about in the youth technology magazine in the seventieth year. Is diesel the ideal engine for a tank? Absolutely yes. Was he ideal for 1941? Definitely not. The most obvious and most dangerous example of the T-34. They installed a diesel engine on it because it is more economical than gasoline and it is more difficult to set fire to diesel fuel. This is the official version. It seems to me that at that time there was simply nowhere to put diesel fuel in the country, so diesel was installed everywhere where it was possible and where it was impossible. What did you get in the end? Indeed, the T-34 caught fire much less often than the BT tank, but more often than any German tank, and even more often than our gasoline T-70. And this is not enemy propaganda, but damned statistics. Our designers began assembling it in the summer of forty-one. Why did German tanks burn so rarely? And their gas tank was in one place, usually in the rear of the hull, and was very small. And the T-34 has a gas tank everywhere. True, the range of German tanks from one refueling was small. But they carried a barrel of gasoline with them.
They also refueled in our abandoned warehouses. But the T-34 could not refuel either in ours or in enemy warehouses. True, at the end of the war, competent tank crews learned to mix kerosene and oil and received fuel on which diesel could somehow work. For those who don't know yet. We didn't know how to make diesel engines. Their diesel engines were the best in the world. But all their diesel fuel was consumed by the fleet.
THE BEST TANK OF THE GERMAN ARMY
It was definitely a three. It was the most balanced (novelty + mobility + weapons + armor) German tank. The tank was the fastest; in testing it overtook both the T-34 and BT. Moreover, the tests were carried out in the Soviet Union and the speed was determined to be seventy kilometers per hour. True, the Germans quickly understood. that you can’t even drive along the highway as part of a convoy at that speed. Therefore, they installed a simpler and cheaper gearbox on the three, reducing the speed to fifty kilometers per hour. The tank had a progressive torsion bar suspension. Besides him, only our Klim Voroshilov had a torsion bar suspension at that time. The case was the easiest to manufacture, in the form of a shoe box. A small technical digression about sloped armor. Once again I explain. Only PRIMITIVE PROJECTILES, which are an ordinary steel blank and are called pointed ones, slide off the inclined armor. Blunt ones with a ballistic tip slip less. And shells with an armor-piercing cap do not slide off at all. When hit, they rotate until they are perpendicular to the armor. The troika had only two fundamental shortcomings. Firstly, this is the layout.
Gearbox in front, engine in rear. On one side, the gearbox protects the crew from enemy shells. On the other hand, the tower can be moved back. This makes it possible not to make a hatch for the driver in the windshield and the crew experiences less shaking. But, there is always a damn but. The gearbox must be connected to the engine with a cardan. And this adds thirty centimeters to the height of the tank. Thirty centimeters of armor plate thirty millimeters thick. That is, the tank carries several tons of extra weight. That is, if there were no cardan, you could increase the thickness of the armor along the entire perimeter of the tank by thirty millimeters while maintaining the initial weight of the tank. This drawback was inherent in ALL German tanks, because they were crazy about this layout. The T-34 TANK had the correct (well, almost correct) layout, but the brilliant designer Koshkin managed to add the same thirty centimeters to the height of the tank by installing a fan on the engine output shaft, which went far beyond the dimensions of the engine. It's certainly easier this way. And the extra thirty centimeters? And brilliant designers are brilliant because they don’t think about the little things. The second disadvantage of the triple is its small size. The tank was just small. It was impossible to mount a gun of a caliber greater than fifty millimeters on it.
STRONG MIDDLE
The German four was a high-quality tractor with a cannon mounted on it. The suspension was primitive, tractor type. To be fair, it must be said that this suspension was easy to manufacture and repair, it just did not allow driving at high speeds. The body was of a more complex shape than that of the troika, although it resembled a box. It was inferior in speed to the T-34, but due to its high quality workmanship, it was far superior to it in tactical mobility. Its short barrel did not prevent it from destroying our tanks, because this gun had a cumulative projectile. The projectile was primitive by modern standards, but it penetrated seventy-five millimeters of armor at any distance. Later a cannon with a long barrel was installed on it. Very often the quartet was hung with additional armored screens. Then he became completely scary, plus the muzzle brake on the gun. And now our fighters are absolutely sure that a tiger is crawling towards them. Therefore, ten times more tigers were destroyed on the battlefield than the factories produced. If we compare the four and the T-34 in '43, then I would give preference to the four. The best optics and reliability with equal fire capabilities and armor protection. As for mobility, tanks do not fly over the battlefield. And they crawl sedately like ordinary turtles. At one time, they carried out a huge amount of testing, comparing T-80 tanks with a gas turbine and the diesel T-72. The eightieth has a higher absolute speed and higher specific power. But as they began to simulate long marches and combat use, the seventy-second won. In general, if the Germans had not fooled themselves with tigers and panthers, but had simply thrown all their efforts into producing the four, then we would have celebrated Victory Day not on the ninth but on the tenth of May.
TIGER THE GREAT AND TERRIBLE
The Tiger was an ideal tank for protecting a concrete airfield. He had powerful armor, especially for the forty-third year. It had a modern torsion bar suspension. He had a powerful gun. It had great optics and was very easy to operate. Unlike the T-34, the tiger could be controlled by any dystrophic person.
Pay attention to the gas tank - it is quite compact and located in the engine compartment and not like the T-34 with the crew. There were only three shortcomings. The same idiotic layout scheme, which added height to the hull and added weight to the structure. The way the torsion bar suspension was made. And the weight of the tank is too heavy. I don’t know what the German designers were thinking about when they designed the suspension. The skating rinks were arranged in a checkerboard pattern, beautifully overlapping each other. Perhaps they wanted to get a particularly soft ride or cover the lower part of the hull with rollers. Although there are practically no hits in the lower part of the hull, they fight in the field and not at the airfield. As a result, in order to change the torsion bar or roller, half of the suspension had to be disassembled. But the most important thing is the weight of the tiger. For any level of industry there is a maximum weight of a product at which the product will work reliably. For the age of forty-three, the tiger’s weight was greatly overestimated. He himself often broke down, and most often the chassis broke down, which was very difficult to repair, and our soldiers added to the hassle. Realizing that it is difficult to knock out a tiger and sometimes there is simply nothing to do with it, a tactical method was invented. In front of the advancing tigers, sappers ran on all fours and simply scattered anti-tank mines. When German sappers tried to collect these mines, since they were lying on the ground without any camouflage, they were knocked out with mortar and machine-gun fire. This technique was used especially often in battles on the Kursk Bulge. Because the Germans, believing in the invulnerability of their tigers, stupidly climbed into multi-layered anti-tank defense. It was very difficult to evacuate the tiger from the battlefield. For transportation, either another tiger or THREE conventional tractors was needed. And this is only if the soil was dry and strong enough. That’s why I wrote that the ideal conditions for using a tiger are an airfield with a concrete surface. By definition, the tiger could not perform classic tank tasks. Its most effective use was the use of the tiger as a MOBILE firing point. The tank stands in a trench (the trench sometimes had concrete floors) and with a ninety-eight percent probability it will wait out an artillery attack of any power. When our troops rise to attack, the tiger crawls out of the trench for direct fire. In this capacity, the tiger is very reminiscent of our KV in the initial period of the war. The KV achieved its loudest victories when it simply occupied some strategic (locally) crossroads and German tanks pressed against it like their foreheads were against a wall. Both tanks had a gun that was quite modest in power for their weight, but had a large number of shells. Tales of the T-34 fighting a tiger. The tale looks something like this - using the speed and maneuverability of the T-34, they entered from the side and hit the side. As a former tanker, I have a hard time imagining this. There are twenty tigers in a line, with a distance of one hundred meters between the vehicles, and in front of them are two hundred of our tanks. And how, or where should one maneuver in order to be between neighboring tigers, at a distance of fifty meters from any of them? Most likely, everything was much worse. In the last two kilometers of approach, nine out of ten of our tanks died, and the tenth, which we simply did not have time to knock out, destroyed the tiger. There was indeed a more successful way of fighting. The front broke through a hundred kilometers from the nearest tiger, the ring closed and the tiger was left without fuel. But in order to fight like this, firstly, you need to think with your head, and secondly, understand that tanks are not designed to fight enemy tanks. In any case, the tiger made a strong, if not indelible, impression on our military. Although it could not be taken into account at all. By the standards of that war, the tiger was released in scanty quantities. He had zero tactical mobility. Even loading onto the railway platform caused a lot of time. Due to its dimensions, the tiger did not fit on the railway platform. Therefore, before loading, the usual tracks were removed from it and special narrower transport tracks were put on. After unloading, the same thing happened only in reverse order.
THE PANTHER THAT NO ONE NOTICED
Well, it’s not that they didn’t notice at all, it’s just that the reaction to the panther was quite calm. Well, another German tank. Apparently after the tiger there were no more emotions left. The panther's armor was conditionally anti-ballistic. That is, the front of the tank was protected by eighty millimeters of inclined armor, and the side had only forty millimeters of armor. For the forty-third year, this was clearly not enough. And the thin side was all due to the same idiotic design of the tank with a gearbox in the bow and an engine in the stern. The panther turned out to be unusually tall. The height was almost three meters.
One of the advantages of the panther is its large ammunition load and a small gas tank located at the very rear of the tank. True, there was only enough gasoline in it for two hundred kilometers, but the panther burned very rarely. A small technical digression. Almost any damaged tank can be repaired. The only exceptions are burnt tanks or tanks torn into small pieces. The Germans put their destroyed tanks into service several times during the initial period of the war. Therefore, our troops knocked out ten times more German tanks than the German factories produced. And then some authors write that we lied a lot about German losses. To be honest, they lied, but not that much. Later, two different concepts even appeared: knocked out and destroyed. Therefore, after the battle, the artillerymen tried to set fire to the damaged but not burning tanks on the battlefield. Since in 1943 we were mainly advancing, the destroyed panthers were not restored but were given to us as a trophy. There were many cases when we received serviceable panthers that were abandoned only because they ran out of gas. The Patera was much lighter than the tiger, but it was not suitable for a medium tank. And in general, the forty-third year for the panther is a copy of the forty-first year for the T-34. It is difficult to knock out a tank, but it is possible, and most of the losses are due to the breakdown of the chassis. Why did the technically competent Germans' chassis break down? Yes, everything new breaks down in the first half of the year, and the weight of forty-three tons (the T-72 weighed only forty-two) is too much for that level of industrial development.
ROYAL TIGER
In principle, there was no need to write about this tank, because this is the height of technical absurdity. But he has one interesting technical solution.
Fuel tanks were located to the right and left of the propeller shaft at the bottom of the fighting compartment. There were several other small tanks in and around the engine compartment, but according to theory they should already be empty by the time of the battle. On the one hand, the tank in the fighting compartment is absurd. But on the other hand, there are practically no hits into the tank at the level of the floor of the fighting compartment. I don’t know whether the royal tigers burned well or badly, there were simply so few of them that there are probably no statistics on this tank.
PRODUCTION OF GERMAN TANKS
Here is a picture from my favorite youth technology magazine from 1970. Next to each tank is the number of units produced. As you can see, the Germans did not succeed in quantity and tried to take it in quality. This would make sense if the war was fought in a gorge ten kilometers wide. But when the front line is thousands of kilometers long, you can’t do without quantity. For all their technical perfection, German tank factories, by our standards, resembled repair shops. A small lyrical digression. This topic was hushed up during Soviet times, but our brothers Czechs and Slovaks made a huge contribution to the armament of the German army. In the initial period of the war in the Baltic states, the Germans attacked practically with Czechoslovak-made tanks, which they inherited after the occupation of Czechoslovakia. And during the war, tank production in Czechoslovakia operated at full capacity. Many point out that German tanks were difficult to produce. This is probably true, although how can a tank shaped like a shoebox and having a gasoline engine be more expensive than a tank with sloped armor and a diesel engine? Most likely it's all about the size of production. We had three huge factories. Of these, one is the largest car production plant in the world, on the territory of which all the Kharkov factories and some other evacuated production facilities were located. Of course it was a little crowded, but it turned out to be the world's largest tank factory with continuous production of tanks. The second plant was created from a former shipyard. The quality of the tanks the first year was terrible, but the quantity was impressive. And the Germans at that time produced a thousand submarines at their shipyards. I think instead of a thousand boats, ten thousand tanks could have been released. The third huge plant was supposed to be based on a tractor plant and, again, a shipyard in Stalingrad. But Stalingrad was razed to the ground. Therefore, the T-34 began to be made at the tractor plant in Chelyabinsk. Moreover, heavy tanks were also made on it at the same time, which from the point of view of a technologist is technical idiocy. The plant was initially not very powerful (eight thousand tractors per year), but the entire tank production of Leningrad moved to its territory. And speaking about the cost of tanks, we must not forget that our workers worked practically for free. And wages are also included in the price of the product. Well, how can we not remember the Americans? They launched the production of their rather primitive tanks in huge automobile factories. And if they needed it, they would have made more tanks than all the warring countries combined. But they needed steamships and so they produced TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED Liberty-class transport ships.
Continuation of work
Everything changed after the creation of the world's first MBT, which was the T-64.
The designers soon realized that an even more advanced tank could be made on its basis... But the difficulty lay in the strict requirements put forward by the country's leadership: it must be as unified as possible with existing vehicles, not exceed their dimensions, but at the same time be able to be used as a means of "dash to the English Channel." And then everyone again remembered the gas turbine engine, since the native power plant of the T-64 even then decisively did not meet the requirements of the time. It was then that Ustinov decided to create the T-80U. The main fuel and engine of the new tank were supposed to contribute to its highest speed characteristics.
What tanks took part in the First World War?
M
- M1917 (tank)
- Mark A.
- Mark B.
- Mark C.
- Mark I (tank)
- Mark II (tank)
- Mark III.
- Mark IV.
Interesting materials:
At what distance should I plant white cabbage? At what distance should I plant Chinese cabbage? Do I need to wash cabbage before stewing? Do you need to wash Chinese cabbage before eating? Do you need to rinse seaweed? Is it necessary to pierce cabbage when fermenting? Where do Chinese cabbage come from? Where do Chinese cabbage come from? When to harvest Chinese cabbage? I over-salted the stewed cabbage, how can I fix it?
Difficulties encountered
The huge problem was that the new power plant with air purifiers needed to be somehow accommodated in the standard T-64A MTO. Moreover, the commission demanded a block system: simply put, the engine had to be made in such a way that during a major overhaul it could be removed entirely and replaced with a new one. Without spending a lot of time on it, of course. And while everything was relatively simple with a relatively compact gas turbine engine, the air purification system gave engineers a lot of headaches.
But this system is extremely important even for a diesel tank, not to mention its gas turbine counterpart on the T-80U. Whatever fuel is used, the turbine blades will instantly become covered with slag and fall apart if the air entering the combustion chamber is not properly cleaned of contaminants.
It should be remembered that all engine designers strive to ensure that the air entering the cylinders or working chamber of the turbine is 100% free of dust. And it’s not difficult to understand them, since dust literally devours the insides of the engine. Essentially, it acts like fine sandpaper.
Gasoline "Tigers" versus diesel T-34-76. Whose fuel was better for the tank?
This topic is hot in every way. It belongs to the classic debates about whose tanks were better, whose missiles flew farther, and whose anti-tank guns dealt with enemy equipment more effectively. German gasoline or Soviet diesel, and which fuel was better for tanks and tank crews?
First of all, everyone knows that diesel engines primarily consume less diesel and are also less fire hazardous. The main quality of a gasoline engine is its significant superiority in power. But if diesel engines were less fire hazardous, then why weren’t they installed on German tanks for the Wehrmacht and SS units? The answer to this question lies in the fact that for the Germans, diesel fuel was used to supply the fleet, but it was no longer enough for the ground forces. Attempts to create a diesel engine were unsuccessful.
In addition, the same vapors remained in empty fuel tanks, so the fire hazard was generally the same. And if the Germans faced the problem of regular explosions of their tanks, then they should have modernized their vehicles or created heavy tanks “Tiger” and “Panther” with diesel engines. But gasoline essentially became a monopoly; only certain types of equipment used diesel fuel. Even the Red Army did not have a problem with vehicle explosions, despite the fact that sometimes up to 75% of destroyed medium tanks were destroyed.
In addition, on the one hand, German tanks were heavier, and on the other hand, their engines were more powerful due to gasoline engines. In the Soviet Union, the situation turned out to be the opposite, but also acceptable.
Source
Prototypes
In 1963, the well-known Morozov created a prototype T-64T, on which a gas turbine engine was installed, with a very modest power of 700 hp. With. Already in 1964, designers from Tagil, working under the leadership of L.N. Kartsev, created a much more promising engine that could produce 800 “horses”.
But the designers, both in Kharkov and Nizhny Tagil, were faced with a whole range of complex technical problems, due to which the first domestic tanks with gas turbine engines could only appear in the 80s. In the end, only the T-80U received a really good engine. The type of fuel used to power it also distinguished this engine from earlier prototypes, since the tank could use all types of conventional diesel fuel.
It was not by chance that we described the dust aspects above, since it was the problem of high-quality air purification that became the most difficult. The engineers had extensive experience in developing turbines for helicopters... but the engines of helicopters operated in a constant mode, and the issue of dust pollution in the air at the height of their work was not raised at all. In general, the work was continued (oddly enough) only at the suggestion of Khrushchev, who was raving about missile tanks.
The most “viable” project was the “Dragon” project. A high-power engine was vital for him.
Mistake or trick? Why didn't the Germans use diesel engines on tanks?
German tanks were
the elite of the Wehrmacht and are very powerful and reliable vehicles. But one of their questionable parts is the gasoline engine. In today's article, I will tell you, dear readers, why the Germans did not use diesel engines in their tanks.
Advantages of diesel fuel
To begin with, it’s worth saying that almost all Soviet tanks were equipped with diesel engines
. Diesel fuel had very significant advantages, which include:
A little about the disadvantages
Before moving on to the main issue of the article, let's consider the disadvantages of diesel fuel
:
So, after comparing these fuels, diesel has the advantage in my opinion. So why didn't the Germans use it?
I also believe that the transition to diesel engines
would not solve the problems facing the German army , but would only aggravate them. During the Great Patriotic War, they did not need to develop “ideal tanks with an ideal engine,” but to work on technologically practical solutions , as Soviet designers did with the T-34 tank at their disposal.
In such a short time, the Germans would not have been able to create a decent diesel engine, but this would have had a very noticeable effect on the number of cars produced. Source
Experimental objects
In general, there was nothing surprising about this, since increased mobility, compactness and a reduced silhouette were important for such machines. In 1966, the designers decided to take a different path and presented to the public an experimental project, the heart of which was two GTD-350 engines, producing, as is easy to understand, 700 hp. With. The power plant was created at the NPO named after. V. Ya. Klimov, where by that time there were enough experienced specialists involved in the development of turbines for aircraft and ships. It was they who, by and large, created the T-80U, the engine of which was truly a unique development for its time.
But it soon became clear that even one gas turbine engine is a complex and rather capricious thing, and pairing them has absolutely no advantages over a conventional monoblock circuit. Therefore, by 1968, an official decree was issued by the government and the USSR Ministry of Defense to resume work on a single version. By the mid-70s, the tank was ready, which later became known throughout the world under the designation T-80U.
Main characteristics
The layout (as in the case of the T-64 and T-72) is classic, with a rear-mounted mechanical equipment, a crew of three people. Unlike previous models, here the driver was given three triplexes at once, which significantly improved visibility. Even such an incredible luxury for domestic tanks as a heated workplace was provided here.
Fortunately, there was plenty of heat from the hot turbine. So the T-80U with a gas turbine engine is quite justifiably a favorite of tankers, since the crew’s working conditions in it are much more comfortable if we compare this machine with the T-64/72.
The body is made by welding, the tower is cast, the angle of inclination of the sheets is 68 degrees. As in the T-64, combined armor made up of armor steel and ceramics was used here. Thanks to rational angles of inclination and thickness, the T-80U tank provides increased chances of crew survival in the most difficult combat conditions.
There is also a developed system for protecting the crew from weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear ones. The layout of the combat compartment is almost completely similar to that of the T-64B.
Why is the 34 engine still in production?
In the shadow of the T-34 tank remains the engine of this vehicle, which is so successful that - attention - it is still produced. Tank diesel B-2 began to be produced on the day the Second World War began - September 1, 1939. But the elegance of its design still amazes the imagination.
50 years ahead of its time...
This will sound strange, but initially the 12-cylinder diesel B-2 was developed for heavy bombers, although it did not take root in aviation: the engineers were unable to squeeze the required number of “horses” out of it. However, the aviation heritage remained, for example, in the “cast iron era” of engine construction, the engine received an aluminum cylinder block and a large number of light alloy parts. The result: very high power density per unit mass.
The design itself was incredibly progressive. Strictly speaking, the V-2 diesel differs from modern superdiesels for passenger cars mainly in the lack of electronics. Let's say that its fuel injection was carried out by high-pressure plunger pumps, and not by the now fashionable Common Rail system. But it had four valves per cylinder, like most modern engines, and overhead camshafts, whereas many engines of that time also had lower camshafts, and sometimes a pair of lower valves per cylinder. The B-2 received direct fuel injection, which is the norm for modern diesel engines, but in the 1930s pre-chamber or swirl chamber mixture formation was more often used. In short, the V-2 diesel was about 50 years ahead of its time.
Battle of concepts
And yes, it was a diesel. In fact, the T-34 was far from the first tank with a diesel engine; Japanese tank builders used diesel engines especially actively in the pre-war years. But the T-34 is considered the first tank designed specifically for a diesel power plant, which allowed it to “capitalize” its advantages as much as possible.
But German tanks remained faithful to multi-cylinder carburetor (gasoline) engines for a very long time, and there were many reasons for this, for example, a shortage of non-ferrous metals, and later a shortage of diesel fuel.
Soviet engineers relied on diesel. By the way, the V-2 engine made its debut on the BT-5 tank even before the start of the Great Patriotic War, but it gained its main fame, of course, in the engine compartment of the T-34.
Diesel had several advantages. Less fire hazard is one of them, but far from the only one. No less important was fuel efficiency, which affects the autonomy of the tank, that is, its ability to devour kilometers without refueling. For example, the T-34 could travel about 400 km along the highway, the German Pz IV - about 300 km, and the Soviet tank was one and a half times more powerful and almost as fast.
Diesel created less interference for radio electronics (no ignition system), and could also run on any fuel, including gasoline and aviation kerosene. In war conditions, this was an important advantage: roughly speaking, having found a barrel with some kind of liquid hydrocarbon of the required viscosity, the soldiers could use it as fuel by adjusting the fuel pump rack. Running a diesel engine on gasoline is harmful to the engine, but in critical situations, the ability to move the tank takes precedence over resource issues.
Over time, the diesel concept won out, and today the use of heavy fuel for tanks is the norm.
The Secret of Longevity
The V-2 diesel is associated with the T-34 tank, although already during the war it was used on many other combat units, for example, another victorious tank, the heavy IS-2.
Over time, the power and designations of the motor changed. Thus, the classic V-2−34 engine for the T-34 developed 500 hp, the version for the IS-2 was called V-2IS and produced 520 hp, for the KV-2 tank the same engine was boosted to 600 hp. With.
Even during the war, attempts were made to increase power, including through supercharging, for example, the prototype V-2SN with a centrifugal supercharger developed 850 hp.
But they started boosting the engine seriously after the war. Thus, the T-72 tank received a naturally aspirated version of the V-46 with a power of 700 hp, and modern T-90 tanks have a turbo version of the V-2 engine with a power of 1000 hp. (for example, V-92 series engines).
Even during the war, the V-2 engine began to be used on self-propelled guns, tractors and other equipment, and after that they were actively used for peaceful purposes. For example, the diesel-electric tractor DET-250 received a modification of the B-31.
In addition to the classic V-shape with 12 cylinders, the B-2 family has spawned lines of engines with a different number and arrangement of cylinders, including for use on ships. For BMPs, “flat” six-cylinder versions of the B-2 with a large cylinder angle were developed.
Of course, the V-2 engine and its modifications had many “competitors” who tried to displace the T-34 engine from the engine compartments of later tanks. You can recall one of the most incredible tank engines, the 5TDF for the T-64 and T-72. The two-stroke five-cylinder diesel engine with ten pistons, two crankshafts and double supercharging amazed the imagination with its sophisticated design, and yet the descendants of the V-2 engine won the evolutionary race.
Why did he turn out to be so tenacious? Its creators “guessed” the basic parameters and layout, which ensured the efficiency of the design and a large margin for growth. Perhaps this is how technical genius manifests itself: fulfilling not only immediate requirements, but also thinking about the next steps.
Humble Heroes
And now is the time to pay tribute to the people who created and developed the V-2 family of engines. Its development was carried out in the 1930s at the Kharkov Locomotive Plant under the leadership of Konstantin Chelpan , and in the later stages - Timofey Chupakhin . Ivan Trashutin took part in the creation of the B-2 , who later became the main engine driver of Tankograd, a tank production facility in Chelyabinsk.
The V-2 engine began to be produced in Kharkov, then in Stalingrad and Sverdlovsk, but the bulk of the engines were produced by the Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant, which arose after the evacuation of several tank production facilities to the rear. It was at ChTZ that the lion's share of V-2 engines was assembled during the war, and the same plant developed the concept in the post-war period, including under the leadership of the famous designer Valentin Chudakov .
Source
Engine compartment characteristics
The designers still had to position the gas turbine engine longitudinally in the MTO, which automatically resulted in a slight increase in the dimensions of the vehicle compared to the T-64. The gas turbine engine was made in the form of a monoblock weighing 1050 kg. Its peculiarity was the presence of a special gearbox, which allows you to remove the maximum possible from the engine, as well as two gearboxes at once.
Four tanks in the MTO were used for power supply, the total volume of which is 1140 liters. It should be noted that the T-80U with a gas turbine engine, the fuel for which is stored in such volumes, is a rather “gluttonous” tank that consumes 1.5-2 times more fuel than the T-72. And therefore the sizes of the tanks are appropriate.
GTD-1000T is created using a three-shaft design, has one turbine and two independent compressor units. The pride of the engineers is the adjustable nozzle unit, which allows smooth control of the turbine speed and significantly increases its service life T-80U. What fuel is recommended to use to extend the life of the power unit? The developers themselves say that high-quality aviation kerosene is most optimal for this purpose.
Since there is simply no power connection between the compressors and the turbine, the tank can move confidently on soils even with very poor load-bearing capacity, and the engine will not stall even if the vehicle suddenly stops. What does the T-80U “feed” on? The fuel for its engine can be different...
Gasoline "thirty-four"
It would not be an exaggeration to say that the hallmark of the T-34 tank was its engine - the V-2-34 tank diesel engine, which provided the T-34 with high mobility. However, not all T-34 tanks were equipped with diesel engines. During one of the most difficult periods of the Great Patriotic War for the country, a fairly large number of T-34 tanks, instead of V-2-34 diesel engines, were equipped with M-17T and M-17F gasoline engines. The reasons for this replacement and what the T-34 tanks with gasoline engines and the tank engines of the M-17 family themselves were like will be discussed in this article.
Carburetor engine from BT-7 for T-34
By its design, the V-shaped 12-cylinder four-stroke carburetor tank engine M-17T was a variation of the M-17F aircraft engine, adapted for operation in tank conditions. At the same time, the maximum power of the M-17F engine (715 hp) was reduced due to throttling and in the M-17T engine it became 500 hp. Just like its aviation “brother,” the M-17T tank engine ran on B-70 aviation gasoline. Before the war, M-17T engines were manufactured in Rybinsk at plant No. 26 and installed in serial BT-7 tanks. It should be noted that in the M-17 family there was another tank engine - the M-17L, installed in the T-28 and T-35 tanks, and differed from the M-17T engine mainly in its greater maximum power (650 hp), as well as the presence of an air starting system.
In connection with the development in 1940 of mass production of more advanced tank engines - diesel engines of the V-2 family, which were equipped with the new KV, T-34 and BT-7M tanks, the M-17T and M-17L gasoline engines were discontinued before the war, and all the devices, special tools and equipment necessary for their production are preserved.
I would like to note that the decision to install M-17T engines in T-34 tanks was a forced and temporary measure, caused primarily by the fact that Kharkov plant No. 75, which at that time was the only manufacturer of diesel engines of the B-2 family, could not fully provide engines, the tank production program significantly increased due to the start of the war. To get out of this situation, on July 5, 1941, the State Defense Committee adopted Resolution No. 29ss “On the creation of backup factories for the production of tank diesel engines and engines and on the evacuation of tank diesel factories.” In accordance with this document, existing enterprises engaged in diesel production were to be evacuated to the interior of the country and, in new areas, to launch the production of diesel engines of the V-2 family in quantities that would fully support the program for the production of KV and T-34 tanks. Thus, plant No. 75 was supposed to be evacuated to the area of the Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant, the aviation diesel shop of the Leningrad Kirov Plant - to Sverdlovsk on the site of the Uralturbomash plant, and the diesel shop of the Kharkov Tractor Plant - to Stalingrad at the STZ. The inevitable temporary decrease in the production of V-2 diesel engines, caused by the evacuation of enterprises and the deployment of their production capacities in new places, was planned to be covered by the production of easier-to-manufacture, but less advanced M-17T engines at the GAZ plant.
Let us recall that the V-2 diesel engine had a number of advantages compared to the M-17T gasoline engine, the most important of which were:
Thus, the flash point of gasoline (the temperature at which gasoline emits such an amount of vapor that it forms a flammable mixture with the surrounding air that ignites when a flame is brought to it) is about minus 40°C, while the flash point of diesel fuel is higher than plus 40°C. Thus, the relatively low fire hazard of diesel fuel reduced the number of fires that occurred during tank operation to almost zero.
In addition, the use of cheaper and less scarce diesel fuel (grade “DT” or gasoil grade “E”) throughout the country had a great economic effect. For example, a 100-kilometer run on the tracks of a BT-7 tank with M-17T gasoline engines cost the state 188 rubles 50 kopecks, and the same mileage of a BT-7M tank with a V-2 diesel engine was four times cheaper - 42 rubles 30 kopecks. Such a significant difference was due to the lower cost of diesel fuel compared to B-70 gasoline and the high efficiency of the B-2 diesel engine.
It was planned to adapt the M-17T gasoline engine to operate on heavy grades of fuel in order to partially compensate for its shortcomings over the V-2 diesel engine. By order of the NKSM No. 280ss of July 2, 1941, this task was entrusted to plant No. 183 named after. Comintern - the main plant for the production of T-34 tanks. Also, plant No. 183 was instructed to develop technical documentation for installing the M-17 engine in the T-34 tank and transfer them to plant No. 112.
Transplantation to "thirty-four"
After receiving the task, Plant No. 183 immediately began work and already on July 10, 1941, notified Plant No. 112 that a large number of changes would have to be made to the drawings of the production vehicle. When installing the M-17T engine, the design of the sub-engine frame and the engine bulkhead in the tank hull was changed; lubrication, cooling, air cleaning and engine starting systems, fuel system, exhaust system; the main clutch, control drives, electrical equipment, as well as the placement of ammunition in the tank.
Tests carried out by Plant No. 183 in mid-July 1941 to install the M-17T engine in a T-34 tank when operating on gasoline in summer conditions did not yield positive results. When the tank moved for a long time in 4th gear, the cooling system did not ensure normal engine operation; the water and oil temperatures exceeded the maximum permissible values. However, despite this, the drawings for installing the M-17T engine in the T-34 tank were transferred to plant No. 112 in early August 1941, and without their approval by the customer - the Main Armored Directorate of the Red Army (GABTU KA).
Experimental work on adapting the M-17T engine to run on heavy grades of fuel also did not yield positive results. Tests carried out in August 1941 showed that the M-17T engine installed in the T-34 tank with a special device for preparing fuel worked unsatisfactorily on gas oil and tractor kerosene.
Thus, Plant No. 183 failed to minimize the shortcomings of the M-17T engine by converting it to operate on heavy grades of fuel. In the conclusion on this issue, drawn up by specialists from the GABTU KA, it was stated that the T-34 tank with the M-17T engine had the following main disadvantages compared to the serial T-34 tank with the V-2-34 diesel engine:
b) Increased temperature.
c) Increased fire danger.
d) The need for a more trained crew to maintain the tank."
As a result, in mid-September 1941, the leadership of the People's Commissariat of Tank Industry (NKTP) and GABTU KA made a joint decision on the need to modify the installation of the M-17T engine in the T-34 tank, due to the start of the evacuation of plant No. 183 in Nizhny Tagil , the responsibility for finalizing this installation actually fell on plant No. 112. In accordance with the decision made, plant No. 112 was obliged to eliminate defects in the operation of the engine cooling system, ensuring the maintenance of normal water and oil temperatures under all engine operating conditions; work out your own 12-volt electrical circuit for the tank, different from the circuit proposed by plant No. 183; to develop, together with GAZ, an engine air start system, as well as carry out a number of other measures to ensure the normal operation of transmission elements and the M-17T engine in the T-34 tank. In addition, by November 1, 1941, Plant No. 112 had to develop and submit for approval to the GABTU KA and NKTP a list of measures to ensure the fire safety of the T-34 tank with the M-17T engine.
Plant No. 112 partially coped with the assigned tasks and was able to launch the production of T-34 tanks with M-17T gasoline engines in the shortest possible time. The first 20 such T-34 tanks were manufactured by Plant No. 112 and delivered to the customer in October 1941. An interesting fact is that some of these vehicles, transferred to the 128th separate tank battalion, took part in the parade on Red Square on November 7, 1941, as part of a combined column of tanks.
From heaven to earth
It should be noted that in October 1941, an extremely difficult situation arose regarding the provision of factories producing KV and T-34 tanks with V-2K and V-2-34 diesel engines. Plant No. 75 was evacuated to Chelyabinsk, and STZ and Uralturbomash had just begun mastering the production of diesel engines. Things were not easy with the release of new M-17T engines at GAZ. Due to a number of production difficulties and organizational shortcomings, the plan for the production of M-17T engines in August 1941 was fulfilled by GAZ by 20%, and the September plan by 14.6%; in total, during these two months the plant produced only 13 engines.
To get out of this difficult situation, the State Defense Committee, by Resolution No. 732ss of October 4, 1941, ordered the head of the Air Force Department P.F. Zhigarev and the People's Commissar of the Aviation Industry (NKAP) A.I. Shakhurin to transfer 900 M-17F aircraft engines to the NKTP for their repair and conversion for subsequent installation in KV and T-34 tanks from October to December 1941 inclusive. The NKTP, in turn, on October 7, 1941, issued order No. 54ss, according to which the Kirovsky, STZ and No. 183 plants were to immediately begin rebuilding and adapting M-17 aircraft engines received from the UVVS for installation in KV and T-34 tanks instead of B-2
.
By the same order, the management of plant No. 183 pledged to begin installing M-17T engines in T-34 tanks, starting with the first tank produced in Nizhny Tagil, and the management of STZ - to prepare production for the production of T-34 tanks with the M-17T engine in this way, so that in the absence of V-2 engines it would be possible to install M-17 engines without disrupting the tank production schedule.
A little later, on October 11, 1941, instructions on the repair of M-17F aircraft engines, which had exhausted their warranty life in aircraft and received from the Air Force KA, and on converting them for installation in T-34 tanks for plant No. 112 were given to the management of the GAZ plant.
In fact, T-34 tanks with M-17T engines, as well as with repaired and converted M-17F aircraft engines, were produced by two factories - plant No. 112 and STZ. The domestic industry was able to fully supply the program of plant No. 183 for the production of “thirty-fours” with diesel engines - all T-34 tanks manufactured after the evacuation to Nizhny Tagil were equipped with V-2-34 diesel engines.
Turbine installation
The main advantage of the domestic gas turbine engine is its fuel omnivory.
It can run on aviation fuel, any type of diesel fuel, or low-octane gasoline intended for cars. But! The T-80U, the fuel for which must only have tolerable fluidity, is still very sensitive to “unlicensed” fuel. Refueling with non-recommended types of fuel is only possible in a combat situation, as it entails a significant reduction in the service life of the engine and turbine blades. The engine is started by spinning up the compressors, for which two autonomous electric motors are responsible. The acoustic signature of the T-80U tank is significantly lower than its diesel counterparts, both due to the characteristics of the turbine itself and due to the specially located exhaust system. In addition, the vehicle is unique in that when braking, both hydraulic brakes and the engine itself are used, due to which the heavy tank stops almost instantly.
How is this done? The fact is that when you press the brake pedal once, the turbine blades begin to rotate in the opposite direction. This process puts a huge load on the material of the blades and the entire turbine, and therefore it is controlled electronically. Because of this, if sudden braking is necessary, you should immediately press the gas pedal completely. In this case, the hydraulic brakes are immediately activated.
As for other qualities of the tank, it has a relatively small fuel “appetite”. The designers were not able to achieve this right away. To reduce the amount of fuel consumed, engineers had to create an automatic turbine speed control system (ATS). It includes temperature sensors and regulators, as well as switches physically connected to the fuel supply system.
Thanks to the automatic control system, the wear of the blades was reduced by at least 10%, and with proper operation of the brake pedal and gear shifting, the driver can reduce fuel consumption by 5-7%. By the way, what is the main type of fuel for this tank? Under ideal conditions, the T-80U should be fueled with aviation kerosene, but high-quality diesel fuel will do.
Diesel or gasoline. About the location of tanks in tanks
We are talking about T-34 tanks and the influence of fuel tanks on the survivability of the vehicle and crew during battle.
“Indeed, the T-34 and KB used a diesel engine, but at the same time they placed the fuel tanks in the fighting compartment. Accordingly, when a tank was hit, the tankers were showered with rain from the solarium. Diesel fuel was difficult to ignite, but once it did catch fire, it was difficult to put it out. Tankers with T-34s sometimes received more severe burns because of this than those who fought in gasoline-powered T-60s and T-70s.
People's ingenuity prompted the mechanics-drivers of the "thirty-four" to consume fuel from the front tanks first. But here's another problem:
when a cumulative projectile hit the tank, the empty tank filled with diesel vapor detonated, so much so that it tore out the 45-mm frontal armor plate. IN
the reality of simple and clear answers to the question “what is best?” did not have. It’s better to put a diesel engine and place the tanks in the fighting compartment or put
gasoline engine and isolate the tanks in the stern, in the engine compartment (as on the Pz.III), where, according to statistics, units of percent of shells and
which is separated from the fighting compartment by a fire partition. The thesis about short-sighted or stupid engineers of a particular country is always worth
be treated with great caution."
Report of the NKV special laboratory No. 101-1 on the topic:
STUDYING THE FEATURES OF DAMAGE TO THE FUEL TANK OF THE T-34 TANK BY ARMORS-PIECING HIGH-EXPLOSIVE AND CUMULATIVE (ARMOR-BURNING) AMMUNITION OF THE GERMAN FASCIST ARMY.
Rep. performers: Rozov, Kaminsky, Shurov
In the battles of the spring-summer of 1943, tank commanders. armies, tank commanders. corps and armored brigade began to note more frequent cases of the death of T-34 tanks in battles, occurring with the explosion of fuel tanks, or a fire in the fighting compartment... For example, the cases of fire of T-34 tanks in the battles of the summer of 1943 near Kursk exceeded the cases of fire of T-70 tanks by 4-9%.
By order of the beginning. BTU GBTU of the Red Army engineer-colonel Afonin September 11. In 1943, a commission was formed to study this issue.
Our group was studying the possibility of an explosion in the T-34 fuel tank when using various armor-piercing weapons and assessing its possible impact on the crew and internals. equipment…
2. Statement of the problem
An inspection by the commission at the SPAM bases of 72 combat vehicles destroyed during the battles on the Kursk salient showed that most of them (68%) were destroyed by a fire that resulted from the depressurization of the fuel tank and the subsequent ignition of diesel fuel.
Approximately a third of these tanks are missing one or two fuel tanks and have damage inside the tank, or partial or complete destruction of hull welds, resulting from an internal explosion.
Only a small part of the tanks (8%) have traces of an internal explosion with traces of fire.
While 24% of combat vehicles were destroyed only as a result of an internal explosion, and no traces of fire were found in them. Often even the ammunition is completely preserved in the stowage.
Members of the commission, engineer-colonel Gurov and associate professor of the Moscow Higher Technical School Krutov, after examining the consequences of the exploded tanks, suggested that the indicated damage was caused as a result of the explosion of the front fuel tanks located in the T-34 tank after exposure to some German specific ammunition.
Group comrade Sarafanova received the task personally from the beginning. GBTU to investigate the possibility of fuel detonation in T-34 tanks when various types of anti-tank ammunition of the Nazi German army enter it.
4. Research equipment
5. Conducting full-scale experiments.
1. During the test, the fuel tank was completely filled with diesel fuel obtained from the accompanying company. letter from Comrade Afonina from 5/X11.
A total of 8 shells mod. 38, 5 shells mod. 39/40 and 5 armor-piercing ones. The results are shown as follows...
During the tests, the tank was completely destroyed 3 times, diesel fuel caught fire 4 times... No explosions were recorded.
When fragments of a Model 39/40 shell hit the tank, the latter experienced sharp braking. Many fragments did not penetrate through the tank...
Conclusions: A filled tank of the T-34 tank cannot be a source of internal explosion of the T-34 tank, but even serves as protection against armor fragments and cores of Model 39/40 shells.
2. Since Comrade Krutov expressed the opinion that gasoline also cannot explode if the tank is full, with the approval of Comrade. Fedin had a gasoline tank installed in the section. At which 3 shots were fired with a model 38 projectile and 1 armor-burning one. No explosions were recorded; in 2 cases gasoline caught fire.
According to the approved program, tanks that were not completely filled were tested.
Moreover, before the shelling tests, a tightly closed tank was carried in the back of a truck along a country road for 1-2 hours, after which the fuel was drained from it according to the attached diagram and the tank was installed on a mock-up...
4 series of shots. Tank full 10-25%
A tank explosion causes a cumulative jet to enter it when it is filled to 25% or less.
The equivalent explosive power was about 30-50 grams of TNT. The hatch cover on the roof of the model, intended for loading the fuel tank, was knocked out.
If filled with gasoline, the high explosiveness of the mixture decreases on average by 1.5 times compared to diesel fuel. The detonation of the tank caused the hatch cover to open. The model's welds remained intact.
A different picture is observed when the high-explosive part of a 75-mm armor-piercing projectile with a red ring, equipped with 80 gr, ruptures inside an unfilled tank. TNT with a detonator of 20 gr. phlegmatized heating element in an aluminum glass.
In this case, the high-explosive effect of the projectile increases sharply (several times). The detonation that occurred during the explosion of the tank destroyed the welds of the bottom of the fender liner, after which the resulting shock wave tore out the bottom and partially destroyed the roof of the model. The layout is rendered inoperative.
The best ratio for detonation of the T-34 fuel tank is caused when it is filled with fuel by 10-15% of the volume and when an armor-piercing projectile mod. 38 “mouths” containing 80 grams of TNT and 20 grams. phlegmatized ten. The explosion causes immediate detonation of fuel vapor, which combines with the effect of the projectile, increasing its power by 2-4 times, which corresponds to the effect of a 105-122 mm armor-piercing projectile.
An even better overall high-explosive effect is obtained when a patronymic rupture occurs in the tank. 76.2-mm armor-piercing projectile BR-350A containing 150 grams of TNT, which in total corresponds to a 152-mm armor-piercing projectile of the BR-540B type containing 400 grams of TNT.
As the caliber of armor-piercing ammunition decreases, the likelihood of a tank explosion decreases sharply. 37-mm and 45-mm armor-piercing shells practically do not cause detonation of the T-34 fuel tank... It should be noted that an increase in the caliber of armor-piercing ammunition does not lead to a significant increase in the high-explosive power of the ammunition exploded inside the tank. Optimal for detonating tanks is the presence of 75-85 mm ammunition containing 50-100 g. TNT, or a smaller amount of stronger blasting substances (for example, 30-80 g of mixture A-1X-2, or 25-50 g of phlegmatic hexogen). In this case, the tank capacity must be at least 100 liters. 30-50 l. containers do not create a significant increase in the high explosiveness of armor-piercing ammunition.
1. Do not allow fuel tanks to be placed in the fighting compartment of the tank.
approx. mine in the T34-85 was not eliminated throughout its production, including the post-war period.
2. During the battle, first consume fuel from the rear tanks, since their defeat is not so likely
3. Try to use structural measures to reduce the accumulation of fuel vapors and the formation of high concentration fuel vapors inside the tank. For example, introduce fuel supply from tanks by replacing it with non-flammable liquid or gas that does not support combustion...
approx. mine In some aircraft, the tanks were filled with neutral gas to reduce fire.
Organize purging of fuel tanks with carbon dioxide and exhaust gases before the fight, or conduct constant ventilation of the front tanks.
4. Reduce the volume of fuel tanks inside the T-34’s fighting compartment by at least half.
5. Place fuel tanks behind sealed armored barriers...
let’s say it’s like in a T-70 tank in an isolated compartment.
As a result of fuel detonation, the frontal armor plate is torn off.
Source
Air purification systems
A cyclone air purifier was used, providing 97% removal of dust and other foreign impurities from the intake air.
By the way, with Abrams (due to normal two-stage cleaning) this figure is close to 100%. It is for this reason that fuel for the T-80U tank is a sore subject, since it consumes much more when comparing the tank with its American competitor. The remaining 3% of dust settles on the turbine blades in the form of caked slag. To remove it, the designers provided an automatic vibration cleaning program. It should be noted that special equipment for underwater driving can be connected to the air intakes. It allows you to overcome rivers up to five meters deep.
The tank's transmission is standard - mechanical, planetary type. Includes two boxes, two gearboxes, two hydraulic drives. There are four forward speeds and one reverse. The support rollers are rubber-coated. The tracks also have an internal rubber track. Because of this, the T-80U tank has a very expensive chassis.
Tension is carried out using worm-type mechanisms. The suspension is combined, it includes both torsion bars and hydraulic shock absorbers on three rollers.
Weapon characteristics
The main weapon is a 2A46M-1 model cannon, the caliber of which is 125 mm. Exactly the same guns were installed on the T-64/72 tanks, as well as on the well-known Sprut self-propelled anti-tank gun.
The armament (as on the T-64) was completely stabilized in two planes. Experienced tank crews say that the range of a direct shot at a visually observed target can reach 2100 m. The ammunition is standard: high-explosive fragmentation, sub-caliber and cumulative shells. The automatic loader can simultaneously hold up to 28 rounds, and several more can be located in the fighting compartment.
The auxiliary weapon was a 12.7-mm Utes machine gun, but Ukrainians have long been installing any similar weapons, focusing on customer requirements. A huge disadvantage of a machine gun mount is the fact that only the tank commander can fire from it, and to do this, in any case, he has to leave the armored space of the vehicle. Since the initial ballistics of a 12.7 mm bullet is very similar to that of a projectile, the most important purpose of a machine gun is also to zero the gun without wasting the main ammunition.
Operating principle of the main gun and loader
When the appropriate command is received, the drum begins to rotate, simultaneously bringing the selected type of projectile to the loading plane. After this, the mechanism is locked, the projectile and expelling charge are sent into the gun using a rammer fixed at one point. After the shot, the cartridge case is automatically captured by a special mechanism and placed in the empty cell of the drum.
The loading “carousel” ensures a rate of fire of at least six to eight rounds per minute. If the automatic loader fails, you can load the gun manually, but the tankers themselves consider such a development of events unrealistic (too difficult, tedious and time-consuming). The tank uses a TPD-2-49 model sight, independent of the gun, stabilized in the vertical plane, allowing it to determine the distance and aim at the target at ranges of 1000-4000 m.
Some modifications
In 1978, the T-80U tank with a gas turbine engine was slightly modernized. The main innovation was the appearance of the 9K112-1 “Cobra” missile system, which was fired by 9M112 missiles. The missile could hit an armored target at a distance of up to 4 kilometers, and the probability of this was from 0.8 to 1, depending on the characteristics of the terrain and the speed of the target.
Since the rocket completely replicates the dimensions of a standard 125-mm projectile, it can be located in any tray of the loading mechanism. This ammunition is “sharpened” exclusively against armored vehicles; the warhead is only cumulative. Like a regular shot, the rocket consists of two parts, the combination of which occurs during standard operation of the loading mechanism. It is aimed in semi-automatic mode: the gunner must firmly hold the capture frame on the attacked target for the first seconds.
Guidance is either optical or by directed radio signal. To maximize the likelihood of hitting a target, the gunner can select one of three missile flight modes, based on the combat situation and surrounding terrain. As practice has shown, this is useful when attacking armored vehicles protected by active countermeasures systems.
