Nose vs. Wing mounted Guns

[TonyJoey]

I tend to believe that those that prefer the wing mounted guns are really reacting to other factors.  There is absolutely no doubt that C_L mounted guns are superior for concentrated firepower and accuracy over an extended range than wing mounted so C_L guns should be preferred but there are other factors.  For instance, 109's have relatively poor 20mm ballistics, very poor forward visibility, and only moderate visibility down the side of the nose for setting up shots.  The Spit has great 20mm ballistics, an outstanding forward view, and great visibility down the side of the nose.  In this comparison it is clear that the 109 is a much more difficult bird for gunnery than is the Spit.  So, is the guy who "prefers wing-mounted guns" really reacting to the difference in where the guns are or is it actually airframe and gun characteristics that give him the impression that wing-mounted are better?

That is definately correct. Spit has definately one of the best over-the-nose making it easier to hit. I also get extremely close to my target before firing, almost ensuring a kill.

[Clone155]

Wings, I like to look over and see my guns blazing 

[Saxman]

It's the gun that counts for me, where it's mounted doesn't matter much. I prefer the Browning .50cal because of its ballistics, range, rate of fire and hitting power, and then I fire in close where the lack of the explosive charge is less of a factor. I can hit almost anything in the F4U or FM-2 with its wing mounted Deuces, but stick me in a 109 and I can barely hit a target with a dead-6 shot with those guns.

[Enker]

It doesn't really matter where the guns are on the plane when they are shoved up next to the canopy of the other plane.

[Karnak]

That is definately correct. Spit has definately one of the best over-the-nose making it easier to hit. I also get extremely close to my target before firing, almost ensuring a kill.

Which is incorrect and if the anti-Spit people (hiya BnZ, Krusty) were serious, that is something that should be fixed and as we have seen so many times, HTC redoing graphics often results in visual airframe changes that significantly reduce usage.

[LYNX]

=Wing mounted=

Easier to aim in tight or high speed deflection and if you don't get a kill shot you have more of a chance to tag a flight surface.   Think spread of bullets before, on and beyond convergence.

Nose mounted guns are like all your eggs in 1 basket for longer range deflection.  Not that there's anything wrong with that and IMO they do have an advantage close in when rolling with a con. 

[cobia38]

  wing guns = spray~n~pray
  nose guns = precision sawsalll
   i,ll take nose guns



.

[waystin2]

I like the ones that have tracers!

[Crash Orange]

Easier to aim in tight or high speed deflection

I don't understand why people are saying this. With either one you're aiming the plane, not the gun. The gunsight is the same for both and the vertical component of the ballistic path should be the same too. Having guns in the nose makes little or no difference to the view - which has a better forward-down view, a P-38 or an F4U?

Easier to get a few hits because the wing-mounted guns are scattershot except at convergence range, sure. But two or three .50 slugs aren't likely to do lethal damage, especially at longer ranges.

[Noir]

nose of course as I tend to shoot at 300 and less.

[Twizzty]

Nose...Concentrated fire and so on, and I need all the help I can get. 

[Enker]

Ok, what do you people consider long range? I consider outside of 300-ish to be long range.

[moot]

Does it really matter at 100-200 yards =)

Especially at point blank.  No risk of missing with a nose gun, whereas wing guns will easily fly around a target.

[Ack-Ack]

=Wing mounted=

Easier to aim in tight or high speed deflection and if you don't get a kill shot you have more of a chance to tag a flight surface.   Think spread of bullets before, on and beyond convergence.

Nose mounted guns are like all your eggs in 1 basket for longer range deflection.  Not that there's anything wrong with that and IMO they do have an advantage close in when rolling with a con. 

You can't beat the concrentration of nose mounted guns over wing mounted ones.  So while you're spraying and praying and just "tagging" the flight surface, the plane with the nose mounted guns just removed the planes wing.  Nose mounted guns also better for deflection shots and as you mentioned, long range shots.  

As for as gun placement goes, nose/center line mounted is far better than wing mounted.


ack-ack

[LYNX]

I don't understand why people are saying this. With either one you're aiming the plane, not the gun. The gunsight is the same for both and the vertical component of the ballistic path should be the same too. Having guns in the nose makes little or no difference to the view - which has a better forward-down view, a P-38 or an F4U?

Easier to get a few hits because the wing-mounted guns are scattershot except at convergence range, sure. But two or three .50 slugs aren't likely to do lethal damage, especially at longer ranges.

Hence me saying

Easier to aim in tight or high speed deflection and if you don't get a kill shot you have more of a chance to tag a flight surface.   Think spread of bullets before, on and beyond convergence.

Nose mounted you either hit or miss but with wing mounted you stand a better chance to tag the con.  That's maybe one wings 50's or cannons tagging the guy, depending what you fly.

Enker

Ok, what do you people consider long range?  I consider outside of 300-ish to be long range.

Personally I consider anything over 400 a long range shot and never shoot unless it's a sitting duck.  Others may have different opinions.

Moot

Especially at point blank.  No risk of missing with a nose gun, whereas wing guns will easily fly around a target.

This is true and why I said

Not that there's anything wrong with that and IMO they do have an advantage close in when rolling with a con.

Ack-Ack

You can't beat the concrentration of nose mounted guns over wing mounted ones.  So while you're spraying and praying and just "tagging" the flight surface, the plane with the nose mounted guns just removed the planes wing.

When your spraying and preying your nose ammo at LONG range deflection your missing or hitting.  You have no chance to tag the con.  There is no in between.  Hence me saying

Nose mounted guns are like all your eggs in 1 basket for longer range deflection

As for as gun placement goes, nose/center line mounted is far better than wing mounted.

Which rightly so is a matter of opinion.