I tend to believe that those that prefer the wing mounted guns are really reacting to other factors. There is absolutely no doubt that CL mounted guns are superior for concentrated firepower and accuracy over an extended range than wing mounted so CL 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?
