Biggest problem is, from my understanding, is that a turbine engine runs best at high speed for a long time. This is great for aircraft and ships but a tank spends a great deal of time at or near idle. So the turbine ends up using lots more fuel than a diesel engine. It's all about the supply chain.
It's a little like re-engineing the B-52. Everyone agrees it should be done but nobody ponies up the money to do it. So the taxpayers money keeps going out the exhaust pipe.

but conversely a turbine give unparalleled weight/ power ratios, which on the modern western tank is so something of a problem, its where the US went on the protection/ firepower/speed triangle,  they could get an advantage over the diesel / petrol engines in the area,  and the US army has the logistical tail, and capability's to use that .
All aspects of a tank are compromises, and a modern army "runs on doctrine as much as diesel"  i once saw written.

One massive advantage of a turbine over a diesel is extreme cold weather starting and running.
A diesel needs a ton of warm up time ..it also needs oils and fuel additives to keep everything liquid..ive seen oil look like tar in extreme cold and rubber hoses snap like their made of balsa wood.
A turbine can be started and hit full power even in stupid cold weather..like -30c + ..that was a test done on the Abrams before it entered service.
Also alot less moving parts.
As from a wiffy point of view..fitting a diesel to a Abrams could be a mod done for the sale of a much cheaper tank to countries who can't support anything to technical..simplified gun sites..simplified armour..a simple Abrams for a simple buyer ..great sales pitch 

If a turbine engine was good enough for Batman it's good enough for the US Army...
 

Other than a Jet powered DH2 I have no firm ideas for this GB.

Quote from: zenrat on June 05, 2023, 05:17:34 AMOther than a Jet powered DH2 I have no firm ideas for this GB.

Should be good with an RB-211 on a pylon above the wing. The DH2's a very draggy airframe after all.............. 

ive done my lear and my Falcon,  but theouse were a set of engines from an A-10 onto the learjet, ( they are just a bought the same diameter as the fuselage )  and then the spares on the the Falcon,  so 4 rear mounted engines on that, the last bit of the move round was going to be 2 of the engines of a AC130, on to the A-10,  going to have them on the wheel housings ( all of the above were in 1:48)

I like the turbo prop A-10 idea!

As mentioned elsewhere I have in mind  are-engining of the Beaufighter, original thought was Centaurus (so a couple of Matchbox Tempests were acquired, then maybe Sabres would be fun, only to find that great mind think alike - see earlier on this thread!

So I do have a Merlin conversion set for the Beaufighter and the Beaufort is pretty much the same wing huh?

Quote from: Doug K on June 05, 2023, 01:03:13 PMAs mentioned elsewhere I have in mind  are-engining of the Beaufighter, original thought was Centaurus (so a couple of Matchbox Tempests were acquired, then maybe Sabres would be fun, only to find that great mind think alike - see earlier on this thread!

So I do have a Merlin conversion set for the Beaufighter and the Beaufort is pretty much the same wing huh?

Just cause we're all great minds Doug don't mean ya still can't build ya idea mate.
I love the Beaufighter..alot of fire power in a small package..and it's a twin 😍
I've been looking over my Tigercat lately and yep I'm in for some work to mount 2 Griffons on that..the Griffons are alot narrower than the original radials .

And in the department of ugly mounting a Tigercat radial on a MK19 Spitfire   

Kerick...  If you want to use it, please be my guest     i can think of no better accolade that having my ideas used by my peers     My version is a long way off at the moment as i have other "things" that i wish to build

Quote from: kerick on June 05, 2023, 11:24:25 AMI like the turbo prop A-10 idea!

Fitted with 5 bladed props so it looks lot more modern..like the props used on the late model C130s and M400.
That would look damn cool 😎

Quote from: Doug K on June 05, 2023, 01:03:13 PMAs mentioned elsewhere I have in mind  are-engining of the Beaufighter, original thought was Centaurus (so a couple of Matchbox Tempests were acquired, then maybe Sabres would be fun, only to find that great mind think alike - see earlier on this thread!

So I do have a Merlin conversion set for the Beaufighter and the Beaufort is pretty much the same wing huh?

Centaurus is too heavy for Beaufighter.  Read the relevant sections on the tortuous development of the Brigand in BSP Vol.3.

My own plan to do a Sabre Beau has foundered on the fact the replacement nacelles are mahoosive and just too big for the Beaufighter.

I've been wanting to do a Merlin Beaufort for some time and did look at using the Alleycat Merlin Beaufighter conversion on the Airfix new tool Beau, but it didn't quite fit.

Four CFM-56 engines on a B-52!

Quote from: kerick on June 05, 2023, 10:43:38 PMFour CFM-56 engines on a B-52!

Might need a bit more poke than that, but it's a good start.

I've been nosey ...4 CFM-56 engines would definitely get a B-52 moving.
The lowest rated thrust is 18500 pounds..the T-33s one the 52 are only 17000lbs
If it was fitted with the most powerful version of the CFM-56 at 34000 lbs would give the 52 136,000 lbs from 4 engines .
Strangely 8 T-33s = the same ..136,000 lbs thrust.
The B-52 is getting new engines soon from Rolls-Royce but I'd still like to see a four engined B-52.