[Tailback]

Two questions.

Is it stabilized?

How vulnerable to small arms fire is all the whizbang gizmos?

If all it takes is one bullet in the right place to disable it, how is that any different than killing the gunner?

[PapaBear3625]

If all it takes is one bullet in the right place to disable it, how is that any different than killing the gunner?

The vulnerable areas are smaller, and easier to replace than a gunner.

I'd like to see them deployed on fully remote-controlled vehicles. Let the unmanned vehicles take point.

[EternalVigilance]

If all it takes is one bullet in the right place to disable it, how is that any different than killing the gunner?

Well, I'm sure it's a whole lot different for the gunner...

[PAR35]

If all it takes is one bullet in the right place to disable it, how is that any different than killing the gunner?

You equate scrap metal to a dead soldier?

[piytar]

“If all it takes is one bullet in the right place to disable it, how is that any different than killing the gunner?”

Um, because it’s not a human being with parents and maybe a family of its own?! Wow.

[Eagles6]

"If all it takes is one bullet in the right place to disable it, how is that any different than killing the gunner?"

The gunner is still alive.

[paul51]

If all it takes is one bullet in the right place to disable it, how is that any different than killing the gunner?

The gunner would consider the difference significant

[PsyOp]

If all it takes is one bullet in the right place to disable it, how is that any different than killing the gunner?

The wiz-bang gizmo doesn't get sent home in a flag-draped box, for one. Also, those components are much sturdier than a gunner (even with body armor) and can return fire even after being hit, unlike a dead or wounded gunner. Much more difficult to take out that gun with small arms fire than to take out a gunner.