Noise factor is overstated. You would have to be deaf not to hear a MBT for miles.The T-80U had the gas turbine engine. It is noisy and spends a lot of fuel
Infact Abrams gas turbine is rather quiet for a tank which is like saying a death metal band is rather mellow.
The issue with gas turbines is also more a product of the time. T80 was one of the first of the Gas turbine tanks a rarity yes. But when you compare but as that engine type as advanced fuel economy gets better.
The Russians just never really updated the power pack. And the Ukraine never gave the GT a chance. Compounding this is that as time as progressed more armor kits entered service but no power pack upgrades. Until what really killed T80 when the maker fell apart in the new economy. An APU wouldn't have hurt either.
T80U gets over blamed as a failure really the issues were The Russian Army was tank crazy with a half dozen types in service so when they were needed they couldn't get the right ERA.Unlike the Type 99A which has been kept relevant through the years with continuous updates, the Black Eagle would take heavy work to become PLA standard. And the final result would be an inferior tank, based on the T80U with it’s catastrophic performance. The Type 99A already has a large turret that can fit larger guns
Otherwise it's was an age issue.
However what black eagle offered was a Long New gun with unitary ammo. Truth is that it was never built but was trailing elements of the system. The bustle rack needed because of the ammo.
you can have the best tank in the world but if you don't know or bother to employ it properly it's a hunk of junk.Problem with the bustle storages is that the tank can be mission killed by a casual hit to the turret sides which are harder to protect than the bottom hull side where the 99A stores it’s ammo. Look up videos with the M1A1s destroyed by houthis and ISIS.
Besides two fallacys here
1) not every hit to the back of a Bustle rack tank hits the magazine.
Sorry but a casual hit is just as likely to destroy a back pack or tool box. Like on Type 99 and Russian tanks you have other things stored in the bustle area that don't go boom. Remember at the end of the Iraq invasion American forces commenced "Thunder runs" where tanks like Abrams tore though Baghdad as a show of power. As they did so they came under attack with everything the Iraqis had left. Most of the tanks came back operational despite large amounts of equipment set a blaze.
During one run an Abrams was disabled but not because of the ammo storage but because an RPG nailed a fuel cell and started an engine fire.
You also have slat armor back there to. Chances of actually nailing the magazine are not as good as it might seem.
2) is that a tank like a Type 99 would be operational from a hit like that. Reality is that's still the thinner armor of the tank turret. Again assuming that they don't kill something useless like the snorkel or hit the extra fuel drums there is still a chance of nailing the actual back of the turret in a soft spot which would likely penetrate possibly kill the turret crew but very likely start a fire a fire inside the turret that is sitting on a powder keg.
Of course it's just as likely to hit the power pack which is a kill for that tank.