Game Changer

K51 Panther - Think this may be the answer to the every other nations tanks, I like how it can release drones with a loiter time of 60 minutes packing a 9lb war head no doubt a top attack weapon. Also they have reconnaissance drones released from the turret, 360 cameras on the tank giving the crew visibility all around the tank no doubt IR as well.
Also the 130mm main gun has reputedly a 50% increase in kill range than the 120mm gun favoured by NATO tanks, saying it counters the Javelin & top attack weapons.

Got to hand it to the Germans they do build a very nice piece of kit should be a good answer to the Type 99A that China has as its current version.
How Powerful is Germanys Newest KF51 Panther Main Battle Tank? - YouTube

Maybe they oughta give a few to the Ukrainians to test out, nothing like being battle tested.

I wonder how thick the belly armour is, and is it reactive? Drones with vertically-oriented shaped charges and fly them under the nose or the tail.

Presumably the turret extension is built to separate from the turret if a satchel charge or a missile should happen to find its way between the turret and the top plates. Otherwise the effect is going to be like a bottle-opener.

At 6:53 you can see the gun bounce off its depression stops; the trade off for a low profile.

A fourth crewman just to fly drones? That tells us plenty. One has to wonder about the return on investment, and more importantly, what are the infantry riding in?

So far only the Israelis(?) seem to have come up with a logical answer to that question with the Achzarit.

2022 and same old tracks and no less vulnerable than they were in 1942. Tanks are more and more expensive and mines are cheap as ever.

Debatable whether something like the Swedish S "tank" is not a better investment over all. Of course the Soviets used to pretend they'd lost interest in SPG's after WWII and maybe the Germans are doing so now? After all, they were pioneers in that field.

I have not come across the schematics of the crew placements Surpmil and doubt they would be out there yet but I think the current doctrine of thinking now is to place all the crew with the driver.
Having the gunner and commander in with him separated from the turret, an auto loader in the turret hopefully they have learnt from the Russians and how well the bustled ammo goes up they may have a rotary rack in the back separated like the Abrahams ammo storage.
As for the drones not sure if they have a 4 man crew whether they park up out of sight and fly then is unknown but hiding on a battlefield now is virtually impossible as is being proven in the Ukraine conflict much to the detriment of soviet forces.

As has been mentioned the best way to evaluate a weapon is in actual combat and the one thing they cannot get away from is a tank relies on its tracks take them out and your dead in the water.
Although Christie proved a tank running on road wheels without tracks with his suspension it was clocked at6 60mph on a road the US never took it up but the Russians did with their T-34 lineage and that tank proved a rather nasty surprise to the Germans in WWII.

In those Ukraine war videos it's amazing how often several of the crew make it out after what you'd think was an absolutely fatal hit and explosion.

There's probably no way of preventing ammo cook-offs, short of stowing it in a trailer. Presumably the next US MBT will get an auto-loader like the T-72 and successors have.

The video implied the fourth crewman was the drone operator. The next step will be onboard computers to use the drone feeds to locate and select (even engage?) targets "automatically". Probably the Germans have incorporated something like this here.

According to the president of Raytheon, the USA, and no doubt the UK and other allies also, are providing the Ukrainian forces with real-time battlefield intelligence and target indication, down to the level of individual vehicles, as well as sigint of course. The planes and satellites that provide this intel are not being targeted by the Russians for political reasons, so that is stilting the conclusions to be drawn from the conflict to some extent.

I'd agree that driven road wheels would be a wise step, as per the Christie tanks. More complex and expensive of course, and the driving potential of the wheels would depend on their "treads" and that raises all sorts of problems if tracks are to be used as well. Probably simpler just to go entirely with steel drive/road wheels like the four the French Panhard EBR had.