most people understand how the collision model works. and most hate it as a double standard.
-I can avoid somebody colliding with me on my end and I wont take damage.
-I can avoid somebody having gun solution on my end and I still die. been killed many times by a fighter's tail gunner 
.
the solution to that problem is I dont think about it anymore. It's like trying to argue the ho/front quarter shot thingy.
semp
There are 2 main differences between gunnery and collisions that I think make it reasonable and, in fact, the right choice.
1) Rubber bullet phenomenon aside, if gunnery wasn't based entirely on the gunner's POV, he would see a lot more hits that wouldn't wind up counting, and that would bring massive frustration in short order. Yes, sometimes lag causes you to receive the information that your plane was in fact hit by the enemy after he's gone by, but your plane on his end did get in front of his sights at some point.
2) Collisions are relatively easier to dodge than bullets. You can only effectively dodge bullets in very broad terms because enemy gunnery is only an approximation on your end. You can cut it quite a bit finer when it comes to collisions, because what your end is showing is what will be counted.
Given the alternatives to these two scenarios, I think it makes sense how they have it set up. Between the two, bullets hitting me from funny angles annoys me a lot more than the other guy not dying when he runs into me. It's an imperfect world, but as you say, we put up with it.
Hitech- You should sticky that post, maybe also with something about how other planes' gunnery is represented on your FE.
Wiley.
