Unknown T-80U
© A. Tarasenko. http://btvt.info/

Brief Annotation of the Article "Unknown T-80U"

Part 1: Development and Specifications. The article details the development of the improved T-80U tank ("Object 219A") in the Soviet Union, focusing on its design and production challenges during the late 1970s and early 1980s. Initiated by a 1976 decree, the project aimed to enhance the T-80’s combat capabilities, including improved fire accuracy, engine power, and armor protection with ERA (reactive armor). The Kharkov Design Bureau and Kirov Plant faced significant hurdles, particularly with the VTDT-1000FM gas turbine engine, which remained underdeveloped. The article outlines the tank’s tactical-technical characteristics, such as a 125 mm cannon, "Kobra" guided missiles, and advanced fire control systems, while highlighting the extensive design documentation and production preparations at the Malyshev Factory.

Part 2: Factory Trials and Outcomes. This section covers the factory trials of four T-80U prototypes conducted in 1979, testing missile-cannon and cannon-only variants. The trials confirmed the tank’s enhanced firing accuracy and visibility but revealed issues with the "Agat-S" device, autoloader, and night vision systems. Delays in engine development and component deliveries, such as the "Sova" illuminators, complicated preparations for range trials. The article discusses the refinement of design documentation and the eventual shift to the 6TD engine, leading to serial production of the T-80U in 1985. It also notes the outdated specifications by 1983, high costs, and low reliability, comparing the T-80U to contemporary tanks like the Leopard-2 and XM1.

"Object 219A" during factory trials. Frame from the film "Improvement."

In accordance with the decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR dated June 27, 1977, No. 577-178, and the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine and the Council of Ministers of the Ukrainian SSR dated August 9, 1977, the following was planned:

• By 1983, complete the establishment of production capacities at the Malyshev Factory for the production of T-80 tanks;
• In 1983, organize serial production of T-80 tanks with the VTDT-1000F gas turbine engine at the Malyshev Factory, completely ceasing production of T-64-type tanks;
• Organize production of VTDT-1000F tank gas turbine engines ("Product 37"), creating capacities by 1985 to produce 1,500 engines per year in peacetime and 5,000 per year during mobilization, to ensure the production of T-80 tanks at the Malyshev Factory entirely with domestically produced gas turbine engines starting in 1983.
• It was planned to maintain capacities for producing 5TDF engines at 500 units per year in peacetime and 1,000 units per year during mobilization.
• To implement this decree, the Ministry of Defense Industry issued Order No. 357ss on August 12, 1977.

In execution of these decrees, the Malyshev Factory completed the following work by 1980:

For the T-80 tank, design documentation for an improved T-80 was developed and released for production in Q2 1978. The documentation includes:

• Total design groups: 113. Drawings: 10,638.
• Chassis (lead developer: Kirov Plant) includes 70 design groups with a total of 7,240 assemblies and parts;
• Fighting compartment (lead developer: Kharkov Design Bureau named after A.A. Morozov) includes 43 design groups with a total of 3,398 assemblies and parts.

Fighting Compartment of "Object 219A"

Based on the released documentation, four improved T-80 tanks were manufactured jointly with the Kirov Plant, using a non-standard GTD-1000T engine boosted to 1,250 hp. Factory trials were conducted, and the design documentation was refined based on the results.

The history of preparing production for the improved T-80 in Kharkov is a separate and extensive topic, undoubtedly the most controversial and least studied in the history of Soviet post-war tank building. To master the production of an engine that did not even exist on paper, new production facilities were built, hundreds of machine tools were purchased, including from capitalist countries, and test stands were developed. Hundreds of millions of rubles were spent without results. This chapter of history was not mentioned until the publication of N.K. Ryazantsev’s memoirs [1], and it will undoubtedly be examined in detail in the future.

This material covers the initial stage of the creation of the last Soviet tank, the T-80U, whose serial production began at the Kirov Plant in 1989 and at the Omsk Transport Machine-Building Plant in 1991.

Chief Designer of the Kirov Plant: N.S. Popov.
Member of the Central Auditing Commission of the CPSU, Member of the Central Committee of the CPSU (since 1981).

Basis

By Decree No. 539-184 of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR dated July 6, 1976, the Ministry of Defense Industry was tasked with ensuring, through the efforts of the Kirov Plant and Malyshev Factory, with the participation of enterprises and organizations of other ministries and departments, the execution of work in 1976–1980 to further enhance the combat and operational characteristics of the T-80 tank, aimed at:

• Increasing the accuracy and effective range of cannon fire and enhancing the power of ammunition;
• Increasing engine power and tank maneuverability, reducing the specific fuel consumption of the gas turbine engine (235 g/hp·h);
• Strengthening anti-projectile and anti-radiation protection for the crew.

The decree provided for the development of a backup power plant variant for the improved tank with a diesel piston engine.

Based on this decree, the decision of the Commission of the Presidium of the Council of Ministers of the USSR on Military-Industrial Issues dated January 21, 1977, No. 19 tasked the Ministry of Defense Industry (Kirov Plant and Malyshev Factory), the Ministry of Aviation Industry (Leningrad Scientific-Production Association named after Klimov), with the participation of the Ministry of Defense of the USSR and other ministries and departments, to ensure the creation of an improved T-80 tank and present six tanks for factory trials in Q3 1978 and six tanks for range trials in Q2 1980.

The Ministry of Defense Industry and the Ministry of Defense of the USSR assigned the Malyshev Factory to develop and refine the tank’s fighting compartment based on a new unified turret, and the Kirov Plant to develop the tank’s chassis.

The development of a new VTDT-1000FM gas turbine engine for the improved T-80 was assigned to the Leningrad Scientific-Production Association named after Klimov.

For the backup power plant variant, in accordance with Order No. 79 of the Ministry of Defense Industry dated February 17, 1977, the use of a four-stroke piston engine 2V16-2, developed by the Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant, or a four-stroke piston engine 12ChN, developed by the Kharkov Engine Design Bureau, was planned. Work on the 12ChN engine was discontinued per Order No. 33 of the Ministry of Defense Industry dated January 19, 1979.

Specified Tactical and Technical Characteristics

In accordance with the initial requirements for the project, "Object 219A" was assigned the following tactical and technical characteristics by the decision of the Commission of the Presidium of the Council of Ministers of the USSR on Military-Industrial Issues dated January 21, 1977, No. 19 [2]:

"Object 219A" cut section

• Combat weight: 43 tons ± 2%.
• Main armament:
• D81 cannon with measures under the "Accuracy-2" project (2A46M-1), 125 mm caliber;
• "Kobra" guided weapon system (9K112-1).
• Armor penetration at 60° from normal to armor:
• Armor-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS) round at 2,000 m: 190–200 mm;
• High-explosive anti-tank (HEAT) round: 250 mm;
• "Kobra" guided missile (9M112): 300 mm.
• Ammunition load: 42 rounds in the missile-cannon variant or 45 rounds in the cannon variant, with 28 rounds in the mechanized stowage in both variants.
• Fire control system, including:
• "Ob" sight-rangefinder, providing a range measurement of 500–4,000 m with magnification from 2.5x to 10x (pancratic);
• "Buran-PA" night sight, providing visibility in passive mode (without "Sova-P" illuminator) up to 1,200 m and in active mode (with "Sova-P" illuminator) up to 1,500 m;
• "Agat-S" commander’s device (TKN-4S) with independent vertical stabilization of the field of view, enabling duplicate fire control from the main armament by the commander;
• Night visibility through "Agat-S" in passive mode (without "Sova-K" illuminator) up to 800 m and in active mode (with "Sova-K" illuminator) up to 1,200 m;
• Electro-hydraulic main armament stabilizer 2E26M1, ensuring stabilization accuracy of 0.4 mrad vertically and 0.6 mrad horizontally.
• The fire control system must ensure:
• Static visibility: 360° from the commander’s position, 215° from the gunner’s position, and 140° from the driver’s position;
• Time to prepare the first shot: 10–12 seconds when stationary, 12–15 seconds on the move.
• Probability of hitting with the first shot:
• APFSDS round: at least 55% at ranges of 2,200–2,500 m;
• HEAT and high-explosive fragmentation rounds: at least 55% at ranges of 1,700–2,000 m;
• "Kobra" guided missile: at least 80% at all firing ranges.
• Auxiliary armament:
• Coaxial machine gun, 7.62 mm caliber;
• Anti-aircraft machine gun, 12.7 mm caliber;
• "Tucha-2" smoke grenade system, 81 mm caliber, with 8 mortars.
• Ammunition: 1,500 rounds for the coaxial machine gun in the missile-cannon variant and 2,000 rounds in the cannon variant; 450 rounds for the anti-aircraft machine gun in both variants.
• Armor protection:
• Turret within ±35° course angles: resistant to 125 mm APFSDS rounds with an impact velocity of 1,780 m/s and HEAT rounds penetrating 500–550 mm of medium-hardness armor;
• Hull front: resistant to 125 mm APFSDS rounds with an impact velocity of 1,780 m/s and HEAT rounds penetrating 500–550 mm of medium-hardness armor;
• Hull sides within ±20° course angles: resistant to 125 mm APFSDS rounds with an impact velocity of 1,350 m/s and HEAT rounds penetrating up to 500 mm of medium-hardness armor.


• Radiation attenuation:
• From nuclear explosion radiation: 18–25 times;
• From radiation in contaminated terrain: 25–35 times.
• Communication systems: "Abzats-R" transceiver and "Abzats-P" receiver.
• Running gear: Six large-diameter road wheels with individual torsion bar suspension and external massive rubber tires; tracks with rubber-metal hinges and rubberized running surfaces.
• Suspension dynamic travel: 280 mm.
• Engine: Gas turbine VTDT-1000FM or four-stroke piston engine:
• Gas turbine engine power: 1,250 hp; piston engine: 1,200 hp;
• Specific fuel consumption: 235 g/hp·h (gas turbine) and 185 g/hp·h (piston);
• Maximum speed: 75–80 km/h (gas turbine) and 70 km/h (piston); average speed: 50–55 km/h (gas turbine) and 45–50 km/h (piston);
• Range on main fuel tanks: 400 km.
• Time to prepare for movement at -40°C: 2–7 minutes (gas turbine) and 20 minutes (piston).

Work Stages

Government directives outlined the following stages for the improved T-80:

• Development and release of design documentation: Completed by Q2 1978.
• Manufacture of prototype tanks for factory trials: Q3 1978.
• Conducting factory trials: Q4 1979.
• Refinement of design documentation based on factory trial results and manufacture of prototypes for range trials: Q2 1980.
• Conducting range trials: Q1 1981.
• Refinement of design documentation based on range trial results and manufacture of pre-production batches: Q2 1981–Q3 1983.
• Start of serial production: Q4 1983.

Schedule for Preparing Serial Production of Object 219A at the Malyshev Factory

Schedule for Phased Introduction of the Improved T-80 Turret into Production

Main Design Solutions to Meet Specified Tactical and Technical Characteristics

Assembly of Object 219A No. 903, Kirov Plant

For the development of the fighting compartment of the improved T-80, the fighting compartment of the T-64B with the "Ob" fire control system, serially produced by the Malyshev Factory since 1977, was taken as the basis, as it most closely matched the specified tactical and technical characteristics. The specified characteristics were achieved through the following main design measures:

• Installation of a new turret of original design, distinguished from the serial turret by enhanced anti-projectile resistance, achieved through the use of spaced armor with lightweight anti-HEAT filler, increased thickness of main sections in the frontal area, altered turret roof slope (promoting ricochet of attacking projectiles), and approximately halved zones of reduced resistance.
• The turret also features increased internal volume, improving crew habitability and accommodating an expanded ammunition load, with the raceway of the turret ring integrated into the turret body.
• Anti-radiation protection requirements were met by introducing boron-containing turret coating, localized protection elements, and individual anti-radiation vests (ARV) for crew members.
• Installation of the 2A46M-1 cannon (with measures implemented under the "Accuracy-2" project).
• Required armor penetration was achieved using artillery rounds developed under the "Nalfil-2" and "Nadezhda" projects for APFSDS rounds and "Nadezhda-K" for HEAT rounds.
• The warhead of the "Kobra" guided missile was also developed for enhanced armor penetration.
• The increased internal volume of the new turret allowed for additional rounds in the fighting compartment, meeting the tactical and technical requirements for ammunition load.
• Installation of a fire control system including:
• "Ob" artillery fire control system (1A33M);
• "Kobra" guided weapon system (9K112-1);
• "Buran-PA" night sighting and observation system (TNP-4);
• Commander’s sighting and observation system PNK-4S based on the combined (day/night) passive-active "Agat-S" device (TKN-4S) with vertical field-of-view stabilization, enabling duplicate fire control from the main armament by the commander and precise target designation.
• Introduction of new autoloader (AL) equipment, providing bidirectional rotation of the autoloader conveyor with a memory device for selecting the type of round, ultimately reducing the time to prepare the first shot.
• Visibility requirements were met by:
• For the commander: Installation of the "Agat-S" device, two TNP-160 devices in the hatch block, two TNP-165A prismatic devices in the hatch cover, and one TNP-3 rear-view device in the hatch cover;
• For the gunner: Installation of the 1G42M sight and three TNP-165A prismatic devices.
• Improved habitability through the installation of new-design crew seats and enhanced transitions between the fighting and driver’s compartments by introducing enlarged openings in the compartment and detachable autoloader trays.
• Installation of more advanced communication systems: "Abzats-R" transceiver and "Abzats-P" receiver, enabling simultaneous monitoring of two radio sources, simplified operation, and an increased number of operating frequencies.

Level of Design Solution Development

The introduced design measures for the fighting compartment have the following level of development:

• New-design turrets were manufactured by 1979 at the Zhdanovtyazhmash Production Association in a quantity of 22 units, of which 11 were tested with projectile impacts, including:
• 6 turrets with sand-ceramic filler in 1976, confirming protection against 122 mm APFSDS rounds with an impact velocity of 1,550 m/s and HEAT rounds penetrating 520 mm of medium-hardness armor;
• 4 turrets with cellular filler (square cells filled with polyurethane) in 1977–1978, confirming protection against 122 mm APFSDS rounds with an impact velocity of 1,550 m/s and HEAT rounds penetrating 527 mm of medium-hardness armor;
• 1 turret with cellular block filler (sealed cylinders filled with polyurethane) in January 1979, confirming protection against 125 mm APFSDS rounds BM-15 with an impact velocity of 1,780 m/s, BM-22 with an impact velocity of 1,680 m/s (allowing, based on comparative data, a conclusion of protection against the 120 mm APFSDS round of the Rheinmetall cannon on the West German Leopard 2 tank at ranges of 500 m and beyond), and 125 mm HEAT rounds penetrating 560–570 mm of medium-hardness armor.
  In 1980, the Zhdanovtyazhmash Production Association was manufacturing a prototype batch of turrets with cellular filler in a quantity of 9 units, including 6 for tanks to be presented for range trials and 3 for projectile impact tests.
  In 1978–1979, the repairability of the turret ring raceway integrated into the turret body was tested on a turret that underwent projectile impact tests, and its functionality after repair was verified through running trials.
  The level of development of the new turret allowed an interdepartmental commission to approve it for serial production (protocol No. 447A/79-01) for implementation on the T-64B.
  The upper frontal plate (UFP) consisted of a 60 mm 42SM steel front plate, a 100 mm metal-polymer block of two 8 mm steel sheets filled with polyurethane, and a 45 mm BTK-1 steel plate. Later, the UFP was reinforced with a welded plate, but this design did not enter serial production.
  In 1979–1980, the Kharkov Design Bureau developed draft design documentation for the installation of ERA (reactive armor) on the unified T-80 turret (based on the "Krest" ERA scheme proposed by VNIITransmash) [3].

Top view on turret of object 219A with cellular filler

• Compliance with anti-radiation protection requirements (25–35 times attenuation) was confirmed by calculations from the All-Union Scientific Research Institute of Steel (M.I. Maresev). Verification of protection will be conducted in 1981 during special tests.
• The 2A46M-1 cannon underwent factory trials in 1977 as part of serial tanks and range trials in 1978. A 15–17% increase in hit probability was achieved, also confirmed by factory trials of improved T-80 tanks. The 2A46M-1 cannon was introduced into serial production tanks starting in Q2 1981.
• Firing trials in 1977–1978 of the "Nadezhda" and "Nalfil-2" APFSDS rounds, "Nadezhda-K" HEAT round, and 9M112-M guided missile confirmed compliance with armor penetration requirements at 60° from normal to armor, including:
• "Nadezhda" and "Nalfil-2": 190–200 mm;
• "Nadezhda-K": 260 mm;
• 9K112M1 guided missile: 300 mm.
• On improved T-80 tanks that underwent factory trials, 42 rounds were accommodated in the missile-cannon variant and 45 rounds in the cannon variant. No issues were noted regarding the ammunition stowage during factory trials.
• The "Kobra" guided weapon system (9K112) was introduced into serial production on the T-64B in 1975 (9K112-1 in 1977). The "Ob" fire control system (1A33M, differing from the 1A33 introduced on the T-64B in 1977 by the addition of duplicate control mode "Double") was implemented. The "Agat-S" and "Buran-PA" systems underwent factory trials as part of improved T-80 tanks, followed by refinement.
• The new autoloader equipment was refined based on the results of factory trials as part of improved T-80 tanks.
• The compartment (AL) with enlarged openings and detachable trays underwent full testing in 1972–1977.
• The "Abzats" communication systems underwent factory trials in Q4 1978 as part of a serial tank and were also tested during factory trials of the improved T-80.

As evident from the above data, most solutions for Object 219A were already developed, in serial production, or had been in development for a long time. However, due to delays in serial production, many solutions specified in the initial requirements became outdated during development and underwent changes. The key unresolved issue was the VTDT-1000FM engine.

Factory Trials of Tanks and Their Results

The Kharkov Design Bureau for Machine Building named after A.A. Morozov manufactured and shipped four fighting compartments to the Kirov Plant Production Association for the assembly of prototypes of the improved T-80 tank, intended for factory trials (two in September 1978 and two in October 1978).

The chassis for these tanks were manufactured by the Kirov Plant Production Association. In November–December 1978, specialists from the Kharkov Design Bureau completed the integration of the fighting compartments with the chassis at the Kirov Plant, as well as the adjustment and handover of the fighting compartment systems to the customer.

Factory trials of the improved T-80 tanks were conducted from January to October 1979 by industry forces under the leadership of a commission appointed by a joint decision of the Ministry of Defense Industry and the Ministry of Defense.

Four tanks were presented for factory trials: two tanks equipped with missile-cannon armament and two with cannon-only armament. The tanks were manufactured and equipped in accordance with the design documentation, except for the installation of engines and the “Sova-P” and “Sova-K” illuminators for night vision devices.

Improved T-80 Tanks Presented for Factory Trials in 1979.

The L-4A illuminator was installed on the left side of the turret (447A.10.13Sb, to be verified). It was later relocated to the right side, and a closed-type machine gun mount was installed.

Preparation of Object 219A for Factory Trials at the Kirov Plant

Due to delays in the development and production of the engines specified in the tactical-technical requirements (the primary VTDT-1000FM and the backup 2V16-2), the tanks were equipped with boosted serial gas turbine engines GTD-1000T (Block 38F).

Since the prototype “Sova-P” and “Sova-K” illuminators were not manufactured by the start of the factory trials, the trials were conducted using serial L-4A and OU-3GK illuminators.

To address issues promptly, working teams were dispatched to the trial sites. The tanks underwent the full scope of factory trials in accordance with the program approved by the Ministry of Defense Industry and the Ministry of Defense. The program included running trials for two tanks and armament trials for the other two.

The results obtained during the armament trials confirmed the correctness of the design solutions to meet the specified tactical-technical characteristics of the fighting compartment and demonstrated several advantages of the improved tank compared to serial tanks:

• The ability to effectively fire by the gunner, both stationary and on the move, at stationary and moving targets at extended ranges was confirmed. Hit probabilities at a tank speed of 25–30 km/h were:
• Armor-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS) round at 2,200–2,500 m: 58.3%;
• High-explosive anti-tank (HEAT) and high-explosive fragmentation rounds at 1,700–2,000 m: 50% and 54.5%, respectively;
• “Kobra” guided missile at all ranges: 100% (firing with “Kobra” involved only qualified operators from enterprises).
• The ability to effectively fire the cannon by the commander in the duplicate fire control mode was confirmed, with hit probabilities at an average range of 1,100 m against a stationary target:
• APFSDS round: 83.3% stationary, 55% on the move;
• HEAT round: 61.1% stationary, 50% on the move.
• Observation conditions and static visibility for the commander were improved due to the vertical stabilization of the field of view in the “Agat-S” device and the installation of five prismatic observation devices. Visibility of 343° was achieved (less than 360° due to obstruction by the wind sensor mounted at the rear of the turret).
• Target designation accuracy was improved by an order of magnitude (4 mrad).

Installation of Commander’s Observation Devices on Object 219A

Single daytime channel of the “Agat-S” device, two TNP-160 devices in the hatch block, two TNP-165A devices in the hatch cover, and one TNP-3 rear-view device in the hatch cover.
Visibility is less than 360° due to obstruction by the wind sensor mounted at the rear of the turret.

• The ability to search, identify, and engage targets at night by the commander and gunner in passive and active modes was enhanced due to the installation of the “Buran-PA” and “Agat-S” devices.

The factory trials also revealed several issues and shortcomings, the main ones being:

• An unsuitable system for aligning the “Agat-S” device with the cannon and anti-aircraft machine gun under operational conditions;
• Insufficient development of the “Double” and “Target Designation” modes;
• Insufficient development of the “Agat-S” device regarding mirror alignment for the night channel, gyro-stabilizer tilt during hatch rotation, electrical interface parameters, and ease of use of its controls;
• Unreliable operation of electro-optical converters in the “Agat-S” and “Buran-PA” devices;
• Inability to aim at night in active mode with HEAT and high-explosive fragmentation rounds at the maximum ranges supported by the “Buran-PA” device, due to the aiming angles of these rounds being comparable to the width of the illuminator beam, causing the beam to miss the target when aiming angles are applied;
• Long preparation time for the first shot (~29 seconds) in the “Double” mode due to inefficiencies in the range measurement method (taking 11–12 seconds) and the suboptimal placement of controls for activating the “Double” mode;
• Operational shortcomings related to the design and placement of certain devices.

Single daytime channel of the “Agat-S” device, two TNP-160 devices in the hatch block, two TNP-165A devices in the hatch cover, and one TNP-3 rear-view device in the hatch cover.
Visibility is less than 360° due to obstruction by the wind sensor mounted at the rear of the turret.

Antenna Block of the “Kobra” Guided Weapon System and “Agat-S” commander sight.

The image also shows fragments of the right hatch variant with two TNP-160 devices in the hatch block. In the simplified anti-aircraft mount variant, one device is on the right.

The image also shows fragments of the right hatch variant with two TNP-160 devices in the hatch block. In the simplified anti-aircraft mount variant, one device is on the right.

Refinement of Design Documentation

The design documentation for the improved T-80 tank, developed by the Kharkov Design Bureau for Machine Building named after A.A. Morozov, the Kirov Plant Production Association, and the Leningrad Scientific-Production Association named after Klimov, includes 10,083 drawing items (6,124 original, 3,959 borrowed; unification level of 39.2%), including 3,582 for the fighting compartment (1,589 original, 1,933 borrowed).

The design documentation for the fighting compartment and chassis was sent to the Malyshev Factory Production Association for production preparation in Q2 1978, simultaneously with the start of manufacturing prototype fighting compartments for factory trials.

To promptly address issues and shortcomings identified during factory trials and to refine the design documentation, the Council of Chief Designers was convened three times (December 12, 1978; March 23, 1979; September 19–20, 1979). During these meetings, necessary measures were developed and approved, and implementation timelines were established.

During the factory trials, the following issues were resolved:

• Excessive torque of the right hatch;
• Unreliable operation of the hatch stopper;
• Low rigidity of the vertical aiming drive in the “Double” mode;
• Large play in the horizontal aiming drive of the right hatch, among others.

To ensure timely and high-quality implementation of measures, refinement of design documentation based on factory trial findings, and their integration into tanks intended for range trials, the Council of Chief Designers, established on September 19–20, 1979, decided to refine tanks that underwent armament trials (Nos. 901 and 903) based on the main issues and to verify the developed measures through preliminary control trials under an agreed program.

By February 15, 1980, the developed measures were mostly implemented on tanks Nos. 901 and 903 and were being verified through control trials, specifically:

• Refinement of the right hatch drive to reduce play and ensure target designation mode activation during tilt;
• New hatch stopper design;
• Simplified anti-aircraft mount;
• Improved ease of adjusting crew seat positions;
• Improved ease of opening the right hatch cover;
• Analysis of the causes of low cannon stabilization accuracy in the vertical plane in the “Double” mode (compared to the primary mode);
• Refinements to ensure the commander’s operation with the “Agat-S” device (hatch rotation) in the 170–180° zone;
• Reduction of glare when observing through night vision devices in active mode.

The design documentation is being updated in accordance with established procedures based on assembly feedback and measures introduced from factory trial results.

Preparation of Tanks for Range Trials

On September 19–20, 1979, the Council of Chief Designers developed and later approved by the Ministry of Defense Industry a schedule for addressing issues identified during factory trials and presenting tanks for range trials, as well as a list and delivery timelines for components for these tanks.

In accordance with Order No. 232 of the Ministry of Defense Industry dated June 3, 1977, the Malyshev Factory Production Association, per the General Director’s order dated January 10, 1980, was manufacturing six fighting compartments for improved T-80 tanks intended for range trials. The chassis for these tanks, as with those for factory trials, were manufactured by the Kirov Plant Production Association.

During the manufacture of tank prototypes for range trials, several difficulties and discrepancies arose, complicating compliance with the delivery timelines specified in the decision of the Commission of the Presidium of the Council of Ministers of the USSR on Military-Industrial Issues dated January 21, 1977, No. 19. The main issues were:

• The Leningrad Scientific-Production Association named after Klimov did not manufacture prototypes of the VTDT-1000FM gas turbine engine, which were supposed to undergo factory trials and refinement before being installed in tanks for range trials;
• The Krasnogorsky Mechanical Plant named after Zverev Production Association failed to timely refine the fire control system devices (1A38), particularly the “Agat-S” complex, installed in the fighting compartment;
• The “Sova-P” and “Sova-K” illuminators for night vision devices, specified in the design documentation but not yet tested as part of tanks, were not delivered;
• The Zhdanovtyazhmash Production Association delayed the delivery of turrets as stipulated in the contract with the Kharkov Design Bureau for Machine Building named after A.A. Morozov;
• The Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant missed deadlines for the development and delivery of the 2V16-2 piston engine for the backup power plant variant.

Of particular concern was the lack of deliveries from the Krasnogorsky Mechanical Plant named after Zverev Production Association of the refined “Agat-S” device based on factory trial results, as well as the “Sova-P,” “Sova-K” illuminators, and the cannon position sensor, as previously set delivery deadlines were repeatedly missed.

To review the state of preparation for range trials of the improved T-80 tanks, another Council of Chief Designers was convened in Leningrad on January 31, 1980, where the following main decisions were made, subject to approval by the Ministry of Defense Industry (approved on February 19, 1980, by L.A. Voronin):

• The Leningrad Scientific-Production Association named after Klimov was to deliver two VTDT-1000FM gas turbine engines to the Kirov Plant Production Association in February 1980. The Kirov Plant was to manufacture two chassis with these engines in March 1980 and conduct factory trials by June 1980.
• The Krasnogorsky Mechanical Plant named after Zverev Production Association was to deliver one set of refined “Agat-S” complex equipment and “Sova-P” and “Sova-K” illuminators to the Malyshev Factory Production Association in February 1980. The Malyshev Factory was to install them on one of the tanks that underwent factory trials (No. 903) in March 1980 and conduct control trials in April 1980.
• The Kirov Plant and Malyshev Factory Production Associations were to manufacture one partially equipped tank in 1980 for projectile impact testing. Timelines: coordination of equipment – June 1980; assembly of fighting compartment and chassis – November 1980; dispatch to military unit 68054 (Research Institute of Armored Vehicles) for testing – December 1980.

At this Council of Chief Designers, at the request of the Kharkov Design Bureau for Machine Building named after A.A. Morozov, the issue of conducting the final assembly of tanks for range trials at the Malyshev Factory Production Association, rather than the Kirov Plant, was discussed, considering the significant amount of adjustment work required for the armament complex on the assembled tank.

Regarding the engine situation for the new tank, a report to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine, “On the Implementation of the Decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR dated June 27, 1977, No. 577-178, and the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine and the Council of Ministers of the Ukrainian SSR dated August 9, 1977, No. 419-009, on Organizing Serial Production of T-80 Tanks with the VTDT-1000F Engine at the Malyshev Factory Production Association,” states [4]:

For the gas turbine engine, the Decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR dated June 27, 1977, No. 577-178, only specified the task of preparing production for this engine, but material resources for creating capacities were not allocated, as design documentation and production technology were unavailable at the time of the decree’s preparation.

Design documentation for the GTD-1000F gas turbine engine was received on November 1, 1977, from the Leningrad Scientific-Production Association named after Klimov, marked “for review,” and consisted of 44 groups with 3,500 part designations.

On June 19, 1978, letter No. 0360/1.38.1705 from the developer confirmed the suitability of the previously provided design documentation for production preparation.

As a result of reviewing the documentation for manufacturability, 10,300 drawings were replaced, meaning each part’s drawing was revised three times.

As a result of the documentation review, the association, together with the industry technological institute, submitted 6,145 proposals to the developer for improving manufacturability and unification.

A metrological examination conducted by the Leningrad Institute TsNIM (director, comrade Kupriyanov) confirmed that the documentation was prepared with 6,145 violations, precision requirements were met through fitting operations, and many drawing requirements were unsuitable for inspection.

The documentation for the VTDT gas turbine engine is constantly being revised.

…

“The head and chief designer of KhKBM, comrade N.A. Shomin, is a member of the association’s party committee. The first deputy chief designer of KhKBD, responsible for the VTDT-1000F engine, was appointed comrade V.S. Kulik, who gained political experience as the secretary of the OKB party bureau.

The party committee believes that in addressing such an important task as the one undertaken by the association’s team, there are no secondary issues; therefore, they are considered interconnectedly during party committee meetings.

Thus, in December 1979, while reviewing the progress of preparing for the production of the T-80 tank, the association’s party committee noted unsatisfactory progress in technological preparation for the VTDT-1000F engine and the T-80 tank, as well as capital construction for these projects.

For shortcomings in work and failure to meet scheduled deadlines, party sanctions were imposed on the chief technologist, communist comrade V.M. Gubin, and the deputy general director for capital construction, communist comrade N.S. Pron.”

The situation was no better with the backup engine variant, the 2V16-2, developed under the “Improvement” theme KV7-10S-77. The work was carried out by the Chelyabinsk Tractor Plant Production Association under a contract with enterprise P.O. Box A-3530, significantly behind schedule. By 1980, factory trials of tanks with the backup power plant variant had not begun. Two initial prototypes of the 2V16-2 engine were manufactured, approved by the customer’s representative only for design testing; the first prototype operated for 120 hours on a test stand, and the second for 48 hours. Engines Nos. 3, 4, and 5 were in the manufacturing stage.

It is worth noting that, in accordance with an order from eight ministries in July 1978, three T-64A tanks with 6TD engines were manufactured, and in August 1978, military unit 55484 modernized two T-64A tanks by installing the 6TD engine.

Trials of the three tanks were conducted in the Turkestan and Kiev Military Districts. The trials confirmed the effectiveness of the introduced design measures. The mobility and combat readiness parameters of the tank with the 6TD engine were significantly improved compared to the serial model, specifically:

• Average speed on dirt roads increased by 10–29%;
• Range without external fuel tanks increased by 3–8%;
• Preparation time for movement at 20°C was 7–8 minutes.

The design bureau, together with the factory, prepared and submitted proposals for modernizing T-64A tanks during overhaul.

It was with this proven engine that the T-80U tank with the 6TD engine entered serial production, starting at the Malyshev Factory Production Association in 1985.

Interdepartmental Commission for Approving Documentation “459” (6TD Engine) in “219,” November 1983

Development of the Active Protection System

To further enhance the protection of the improved T-80 tank, in accordance with the decision of the Commission of the Presidium of the Council of Ministers of the USSR on Military-Industrial Issues dated February 17, 1978, No. 44, and Order No. 128 of the Ministry of Defense Industry dated March 16, 1978, the Kharkov Design Bureau for Machine Building named after A.A. Morozov was conducting experimental design work on installing an active protection system under the “Shater-2” theme.

In March 1978, comprehensive trials were conducted on a tank equipped with a mock-up experimental prototype of the active protection system, which largely confirmed compliance with the tactical-technical requirements.

In August 1979, at Section No. 4 of the Scientific-Technical Council of the Ministry of Defense Industry, and later at the Plenary Session of the Scientific-Technical Committee of the Tank Forces Command, the technical project for installing the active protection system in the fighting compartment of the improved T-80 tank was reviewed, approved, and recommended for further development.

The Zhdanovtyazhmash Production Association, based on design documentation developed by the Kharkov Design Bureau for Machine Building named after A.A. Morozov, manufactured turrets for two tanks with the “Shater-2” system, intended for factory trials in May 1981.

The turret of the Object 478 tank (this index was used for the T-80U for production at the Malyshev plant) with a box-type filler and gun shafts for the active protection system integrated into the turret. 1976-1978.

At the initial stage, the installation of APS counter-munitions was planned inside the niches for the turret armor package. But this installation proved to be unsuccessful.

Preparation for Manufacturing the Pre-Production Batch of Tanks

In accordance with Order No. 357 of the Ministry of Defense Industry dated August 12, 1977, the Malyshev Factory Production Association was to manufacture 10 tanks of the pre-production batch in 1981 and 50 in 1982. As mentioned earlier, the design documentation for the fighting compartment and chassis was sent to the Malyshev Factory Production Association for production preparation in Q2 1978.

The documentation was continuously updated in accordance with established procedures based on assembly feedback and measures introduced from factory trial results as they were refined.

However, by 1980, the issue of supplying the Malyshev Factory Production Association with special steel parts for the tank hull remained unresolved, as the Zhdanovtyazhmash Production Association, upon reviewing the drawings of these parts, agreed to supply only 48 out of a total of 164 designations.

Conclusions

As previously mentioned, the tactical-technical characteristics of Object 219A, specified in the 1976 decree, became outdated due to prolonged development timelines, long before the start of serial production.

Efforts undertaken at the all-union level [5, 6] could not rectify the situation. By 1983, the VTDT-1000FM engine was still not ready for acceptance trials. On September 29, 1983, a decision was made to discontinue work on the VTDT-1000FM engine. Work began on introducing the boosted GTD-1100F engine into production, which significantly differed from the VTDT-1000FM, for which equipment had already been purchased. This included 109 types of imported equipment (330 units) worth 42 million rubles, and 106 types (314 units) from capitalist countries worth 40.9 million rubles.

Apart from the gas turbine engine with reduced fuel consumption compared to the serial model, Object 219A offered no advantages in development by the first half of the 1980s and was a “record holder” in two less desirable aspects—low reliability and high cost [7, 8].

The T-80 tank with a gas turbine engine emerged as an alternative to the T-64A with the 5TDF engine. Therefore, N.S. Popov opposed the installation of the 6TD-1 engine in the T-80, even as a backup variant. Betting on the clearly underdeveloped 2V16-2 engine was merely a “delaying tactic” to give the VTDT a chance, which never materialized in serial production; only 44 prototype units of “Product 37” were manufactured. More details on the history of developing and mastering the production of tank gas turbine engines, created by the outstanding designer S.P. Izotov, can be found in source [9].

Comparative Tactical-Technical Characteristics of Tanks

Note: The data in the table is of historical interest. Some figures are presented to show the improved T-80 in a more favorable light than was actually the case. The table also reflects available data on the tactical-technical characteristics of foreign prospective tanks, Leopard-2 and XM1, as of 1980.

Sources

1. Ryazantsev N.K. Motors and Fates. About Time and Myself. Memoirs of the General Designer for Creating Engines for Armored Vehicles. Kharkov: KhNADU, 2009.
2. Report on the Status of Work on the Improved T-80 Tank. N.A. Shomin. February 27, 1980.
3. Decision of the Meeting on August 8, 1980, on the “Kontakt” Theme (NV7-246-78) Conducted in Accordance with Order 482/400ss of September 25, 1978, of the Ministry of Defense Industry and the Ministry of Machine Building.
4. Report on the Implementation of the Decrees of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR dated June 27, 1977, No. 577-178, and the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine and the Council of Ministers of the Ukrainian SSR dated August 9, 1977, No. 419-009, on Organizing Serial Production of T-80 Tanks with the VTDT-1000F Engine at the Malyshev Factory Production Association. N.S. Lychagin, V.M. Kondakov. May 19, 1980.
5. Decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU. “On Measures to Create Capacities for the Production of T-80 Tanks with the New VTDT-100F Gas Turbine Engine at Enterprises of the Ministry of Defense Industry.” 1980. Draft.
6. Order of the Minister of Defense Industry and the Minister of Aviation Industry. “On Accelerating Work on Refining the Design, Developing Design Documentation, and Improving the Manufacturability of the VTDT-1000F Engine.” 1980. Draft.
7. Problematic Issues of Ensuring the Reliability of Armored Vehicles. A.S. Razvalov. Bulletin of Armored Vehicles. 1987. No. 10.
8. Analysis of the Implementation of Programs to Improve the Quality and Reliability of Tanks. B.Yu. Akimenko, V.A. Kostyan, N.V. Frolov. Bulletin of Armored Vehicles. 1987. No. 10.
9. A. Sukhanovsky. Izotov. A Brief Guide to Studying the Life and Work of the General Designer of Domestic Engines, Sergei Petrovich Izotov, with Memoirs of Contemporaries, Photographs, and Drawings. SK-STOLITSA, 2012.