Mr. T (MrT4) said:

Was kinda expected given the relatively thin armoring of a baseline A4 ,APU is installing the Russian "Kontakt-1" 

Nice look at the 3D printed grenade release mechanism for quadcopters:

Twitter

Paul Jawin on Twitter

How do grenade drop work. Three systems for Mavic 3 drone. 40 mm for VOG-25 and HEDP grenades, 30 mm for VOG-17 gre... https://t.co/ySzfj2oxAv

Read more from Twitter

Adapters are modular: 2x30mm, 2x40mm, and 1x'Universal' for hand grenades or AGL grenades.

Indian Army lessons learned fro Ukraine:

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/indian-army-chief-highlights-lessons-learnt-from-ukraine-war-3884283

The same drone downed 4 fighters?

Mr. T (MrT4) said:

Was kinda expected given the relatively thin armoring of a baseline A4

The Leo2A4 ist not thinly armored. Quite the contrary. For its time it has been one of the best protected MBTs. The armor is just outdated. But it will offer good protection against '80 and up to mid '90 tech weapons.

Mr. T (MrT4) said:

APU is installing the Russian "Kontakt-1"

Anything else would really have been a supprise and made me question the abilities of UA.

The idea to use ERA on the Leo2A4 is neither new nor special. Allready during my service time few of use really understood why we did not have additional ERA like the WP tanks. The A4s armor at the time certainly was good but more is better. Especially for flank protection it would have made sense.
Back in the mid '90 when the conciderable heavier and thus less mobile A5 came out there has been loud thinking about an A4A1 so to speak. Basically A4 with all A5 upgrades except the armor to keep the weight roughly the same. ERA has been proposed to improve protection especially over the flanks against HEAT attacks.
During the mission in Afghanistan this basic concept emerged again. Because the heavy duel grade frontal armor had not been needed. A A4 with additional protection against mines and RPGs would have worked better for fire support in the difficult terrain. The ligher weight and better power to weight ratio certainly would have helped.

Added to which, the Leo 2A4 just looks better.

Sure the vertical turret face has less effective los thickness than the wedge shaped A5 modules, and the A5 turret redesign of the gunner sight installation is a significant improvement, but the A4 just screams “I am a proper tank”.

Incredible Tank vs Trench footage. At ~10:10 you see a tank blasting a trench from handgun range, but whole vid is pretty wild. 

YouTube

?????????? "?-???????". ??????? ?????. ???????-????????. ??? ?2

????? ??? ?? ????? ????????-???????. ? ?????? ??????? ??? ????????? ???????? ??????? "?-???????". ??? ???????, ????? ?????? ?????????, ????? ???????? ???????...

Excellent video showing drone explosives fabrication:

YouTube

????????

???????? ??????? ???????; ???????? ?? 300 ??????? ?? ????. ??? ?? ??????? ???, ???????? ?? ????????! ????? 80 ??????? ??? ????????.????? ???????????/???????...

And from another video, at least some drone munitions are starting to employ a standoff spike to improve burst height a bit.

First documented use of Hellfire in ukraine:

Twitter

Ukrainian Front on Twitter

??The first documentary confirmation of the use of the AGM-114 "Hellfire" missile by the Ukrainian military again... https://t.co/1GyaHR0NgJ

Read more from Twitter

Likely from Swedish ground launchers:

RUSI analysis of Russias unconventional warfare operations in the lead up and early days of invasion, with highlighted excerpts:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1641121980328951813.html

One of many:

Mosin action:

https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/127eb71/footage_of_russian_troops_using_old_mosinnagants/

DavidPawley said:

Sure the vertical turret face has less effective los thickness than the wedge shaped A5 modules

That really is non issue with composite armor anymore. Important is what is inside the modules.
BTW the A4s turret armor modules are angled. But not against the horizontal but the vertical.

The A5 has thicker armor because its armor moduels are thicker. The wedge shape has the function if inducing shear force into a penetrator. Its not really thick and mostly empty. There are some additional angled and movable plates inside which also do that. The concept behind the A5 and later versions armor is different and more advanced.

DavidPawley said:

and the A5 turret redesign of the gunner sight installation is a significant improvement

I don't think it makes much of a difference in reality. The improvement in protection because there is no "gap" anymore is offset by the space taken up on the turret roof and blind spot that created for the commander and the need to mount the CIS higher.
IMHO it would have made more sense to mount the optic on the add on armor modul. Roughly at the same hight but further forward. This way the main armor modul cold be made without a gap while the placement stays more or less the same.