"T-80 and T64 hull comparison: are they basically the same?" Topic

I am starting work on doing the T-80 for this month' Aotrs Shipyards release (specifically the T-80B). As per usual, this entails two or three hours of research and photo/picture locating before I start doing any CAD work.

(The practise of checking Russian-language sites has netted me nearly more walkarounds than I know what to do with!)

As I was coming to the point of starting to have a serious look at the vehicle as I start to model it, I was struck by how very familiar the hull looks; it looks almost excatly like it is the T-64's hull, only with new tracks/wheels/skirts (the wheels identical to the ones on the T-72 it looks like), but with, basically, an extra bit sticking out the back from the new engine block. (Obviously some of the surface details, especially on the engine block will be different.) The dimensions from my T-64 CAD model and the technical drawing of the T-80 are very simialar as well.

I am right? Is the T-80 essentially a T-64 with a bigger engine block and new tracks? (Given te fact that the pre-production T-80 essentially used the T-64A turret this makes a lot of sense if true.)

I'd be grateful if anyone could shed some light on this, before I go too much further!

IIRC, the original T-80 was a T-64A with some rework to fit the gas-turbine engine, and better air filters to deal with the massive amount of exhaust gasses from the new engine that blew tons of dirt/sand around. So it would make sense if they are the same hull (with slight modification to the rear).

Hello, Aotrs Commander!

The hulls are very similar (as, incidentally, and the T-72), but slightly different.
The T-80, as far as I remember, was originally developed on the basis of the T-64 medium tank, more precisely on the basis of the T-64T (the same Object 432, produced by a small series in the 1960s (all around 2000 units), not to be confused with the main battle tank T-64), and only then it began to be developed on the basis of the main battle tank T-64. Plus, the T-80 was developed in Leningrad, which also left its mark.
In short, the differences were mostly in detail or where it is not particularly visible in miniatures. In principle, come down and the body of the T-64.
The T-80 rollers differ from T-72 rollers (T-80 has a smaller diameter).

Right. Thanks chaps.

I've used the T-64 as the basis, though there was a fair bot less to re0use than I thought (all the boxes and such, of course, are different).

I have already come to dislike the T-80 almost as much as the T-64… It's been a bit of a frustrating day; the technical drawings I found (only one of which was not the BV and thus covered with at this-stage unhelpful ERA) are a bit pants, so I've resorted to doing this partly by eye from photos and doing the best I can. I thought this might be a relatively quick job, but by the looks of it, it could be a long pull.

I'll see how I get on on Friday, but if I'm still not making much progress by the end of Saturday, I'll have to shelve the T-80 for a bit, at least until I've done the mext casting master commission. (A change might be as good as a rest, in any case.) So the Shipyards release this month might be more towards the back end the middle as usual!

Perhaps this will help

It might! It certainly won't do any harm. Much appreciated!

UsmanK You can't go wrong with good line drawings !

And instructions for T-80:

yadi.sk/d/ceFZYA-04SZ4I
yadi.sk/d/0dWzUSq84Q_Xe

(click on "Скачать" for download).

you can also buy a plastic model kit and take measurements if you become desperate.

"(The practise of checking Russian-language sites… )

I've noticed that myself.

Duck

Edit: Okay, the simultaneous posting glitch i REALLY annoying, as it apparently wiped my post and replaced it entirely and replaced it with someone else's while I was fixing a typo.

So, again (and briefer):

Swings and rounadbouts.

Having used the provided image, in conjunction with a couple provided by a gentleman on another website, I was able to (with a bit of faff) scale them to the same size and cudgel some sort of concensus.

(And proved the technical drawing, the best I found yesterday, was pretty much just wrong. As I half-suspected, else I would not have been asking questions!)

I was half-right. The T-80 front end (i.e. glacis slope) and the hull depth are near-as-dammit close enough to the T-64 for the purposes in question. The rear end is slightly longer than I had accounted for and, as I half-expected from yesterday's examinations, in particular, the rear sprocket is about 1.4mm (at 144) further back.

(Sadly, UsmanK's provided drawing, which I will now have to work from (because it's the only one that's got multiple projections and is not just wrong) suffers particularly from the hazard of the job niggle that the various projections are not, in fact, the same size as each other. But beggars can't be choosers…!)

I did not come across any clever drawings for the T-80, to be honest. Yes, and no normal books about T-80 (in May new Pavlov's book about T-80 should come out, maybe there will be normal drawings).
By the way, with the location of ERA on drawings from the Internet and early books, too, a bunch of errors.Visibility, the T-80BV and the early T-80UD are confused.

I have some posters from when I was in the Army with some nice line drawings of Russian/WP vehicles. For ID and targeting. I have them hung up too. Mostly older stuff like T-55s, T-62s, etc.

Might this help?

link