http://derstandard.at/?url=/?id=1949272

Well, I am not that enthusiastic about future developments of the Typhoon. Are there any concrete plans to design larger fuel tanks ?
I know about intensions to encrease the maximum weight, that can be carried under inboard and midwing pylons.
CFT’s exist only as mock-up, maybe windtunnel experiments have taken place, but nothing else. Rafale is here clearly ahead. They flew at least with CFT’s installed.
The Typhoon lacks clearly in the field of (US-) independent weapons. Eurofighter nations could only offer WVR weapons (Iris-T, ASRAAM) and ALCM’s (Taurus, StormShadow). BVR is only possible with AMRAAM, precision strike only with GBU-16, 24 & 32.
The Meteor will become available 2008, for Gripen and Rafale.

I think the Rafale would be the better choice compared to Typhoon for two reasons:

1- India already operates Dassault aircraft. Many weapons could be used with the Mirage as well as the Rafale. Typhoon relies mostly on US-weapons. (At the moment only Asraam or Iris-T are european, everything else is US made. (AMRAAM, Paveway, J-DAM,…)

2- There is a carrier-variant, and India got a carrier programme.

Only if China’s increasing Flankerfleet is the driving factor behind this tender, I would prefer the Typhoon.

In my opinion the MiG-29 is the most likely candidate. If fast delivery and low cost is the priority SMT’s (read used airframes) would do. 5 million a piece and fast available. Enough money saved to bring all existing MiG-29S to SMT standard, and for the MCA development.
Otherwise the M/M2 with it’s large commonality with the IN’s MiG-29K is still cheaper then any european fighter.
Even if they ask for a twin engined fighter, I would rate the chances of the Mirage higher then that of the Rafale. The Indians have no problems with the safety of their M2K’s, so better not exclude them.

Nobody could be that stupid to sell them Typhoon’s or anything else that modern.

What are the differences between the U-212 and the U-214 ? AFAIK the latter is bigger, which translates in bigger endurance, but apart from that they are pretty much the same. One of the reasons why the Portuguese Navy originally wasn’t very interested in the U-212 vs the U-209 was that the former was perceived as a “closed waters sub”, appropriate for the Med or Baltic Sea but not that good for the Atlantic.

The 212 needs less crew, is more roomy (->more comfy for the crew),
has shorter reload times, is more manouverable (X-helm, new hull shape), is faster, is quieter and got partly better sensors.
Then the tanks for the hydrogen is stored between primary and secondary hull, for safety reasons. It uses the better, but more expansive, type of PEM’s in their fuel cells.
In the 214 the hydrogentanks are inside the hull, it uses if possible parts from the 209. This saves for shure money and gives a better availability for spares at the moment.

Castor, Europe is not like US (bitchy about selling arms). So there is a possibility. Regarding export regulations – politics comes first than rules… In my opinion, french will sell anything for hard cash. So point here is whether PN can afford it or not.

There is no EUROPE. France and the British may sell their stuff to everybody that doesn’t interfere with their interest, but Sweden and Germany have much more restricted rules for exports. Bloody hell, Germany refuses to sell Leopard 2 tanks to Turkey, a NATO-Member, because of human rights situation.
U-214 is a different thing. It is not build in Germany. In fact it is build in Greece. The U-214 is nothing but a upgraded U-209 with some stuff from the U-212. So, there may be a chance if Pakistan really wishes to field an additional design.

With the knowledge of today I would say the F-23 had been the better a/c.
It has better range and could certainly be much easier converted into a fighter bomber. The aerodynamics were better and it should have lower running costs.(absence of TVC for example) Then the heat distribution was better solved in the F-23, which causes the F-22 till today problems.