I don't particularly care for the LA-7 myself. I fly it when I just got gangbanged by 5-6 cons and I want to be invincible for a flight or two.
People who say "It is the pilot, and not the plane" are fools if they think the PLANE has absolutely nothing to do with it. Lets take two hypothetical pilots of equal skill. One is silly and flies the 109E-4, one flies the Spit IX. They meet in a co-alt, head-on situation. Who's going to win? Well, you never can tell, but I'd say the Spitfire has a pretty good chance of winning that one. It is faster than the 109, it turns better (although not much better), it rolls twice as fast, it accelerates faster at all speeds, it climbs better, it dives better (duh), it has at least twice the firepower. But lets take this one step farther. The 109 pilot is an uber-ace. The Spitfire is a complete newbie. Who's going to win that one? I'd guess probably the uber-ace, but it isn't guaranteed by any means. Well, lets try it the other way around. The Spit IX pilot is an uber-ace, and the 109 pilot is a newbie. Who's going to win that one? Spitfire, hands down. 10 out of 10. Why the difference? Well, in the equal skill test, one pilot has all the advantages in every category that matter in air combat (and probably all the ones that don't too). In the 109's an ace scenario, the pilot obviously has much greater skill and experience to draw on, but he has to 'get inside his opponents head' to win- he has to understand what the Spit is going to do and counter it before it actually happens. In the Spit's an ace scenario, the Spitfire pilot has ALL the advantages. He has a much more worthy plane, and he is a more experienced and skilled pilot to boot.
To me, the La-7 is a necesary evil. It is a good plane that offers many advantages so that relatively unskilled pilots can have success and feel good, and keep their accounts. It has a good solid financial reason to be in the game. It is uber beyond belief? Nope, not in my opinion. A good 109G-10 or P-51D pilot CAN take on a lesser skilled opponent in an La-7 and have a good chance of winning the fight. The performance advantages that the La-7 offers aren't THAT much over and beyond what planes like the P-51D, 190-D9, 109G-10, or Typhoon offer. It is faster than all the planes listed, it accelerates better than all the planes listed, and it turns better than all the planes listed- but it the LA-7 screws up he doesn't have THAT much of a comfort zone to fool around in. Above 10k, I'd actually take a G-10 over a La-7.
About the firepower- the La-7 does not lack firepower. In hangar tests the cannon were found to be as effective as Hizookas in taking down hangars (they fire faster, but do less damage). My 'best' sortie ever was in an La-7, I got somewhere in the low 20's (with 3 or 4 rearms). The guns are NOT anemic, they are actually quite effective. Even the ammo loudout isn't too poor- it doesn't have the 240 RPG (or something like that) of the F4U-1C- but 150 RPG is fairly standard in nose mounted cannon.
Anyway, give it up about having the La-7 perked, it isn't going to happen. Firstly, it has a sound economic reason for being, and secondly, even if it were perked they'd just move to the P-51 or Tiffie (or perhaps Spit IX or N1K2, depending on how they like to fight).
Although the folks telling people they are 'whiners' just because 'they don't know how to fight and get killed by LA-7s' don't really have a leg to stand on either in my opinion. The 'whiners' have a very valid point in that the LA-7 DOES offer a plane that requires much less skill to fly than any pre-1944 plane, and somewhat less than even those.
