There comes a point to freeze a design and just build it. Is the Indian bureaucrat prone to ADD? They should have had several squadrons by now by aiming at needs and stop worrying about threats two decades out.

And you can use other means, like wingtip ecm packages, rather than missiles for generally the same benefit.

RoE never let’s you take the gloves off. HOJ would make a difference and newer AMRAAM is multi mode, allowing dual active and passive strategies at the same time. You don’t want to rely on electronics for survival, they are simply a situational tool. Eventually you want to get away from them.

I have a feeling they paid something for the design and altered it from there. It had too much in common to be indigenous.

Did the knight with the longer lance always win the joust?

It looks like a radio command missile of some type. The missile on the far left looks like the Alkali family, although the body was adopted for an asm.

The X-32 is more than twice the size of its competitors. That is what I call overkill 😉

If it was the original, yes. I’m saying on greatly reduced in size and using current off the shelf hardware to keep costs down. No STOVL or VTOL required. Big relative wing and short length coupled to efficient engine, the same core that over 50% of the fleet uses. Go for maximum bang and profit. Boeing didn’t write the asinine KPP. Doesn’t mean they cannot steal the deal. And it undermines future LM sales without threatening F-35 sales.

btw – there are non-afterburning variants of the F100 and F110.

The F100-PW-220U is capable of providing up to 16,000 pounds of thrust while operating in a maritime environment. A key feature being a convoluted S-shape jet-pipe terminating in a flat fishtail propulsive nozzle for minimal signature, and fitted with simplified control system. It was developed OTS for X-47B. It is widely regarded as the key stepping-stone to the first fully stealthy UAV engine.

The F-118-GE-100 is capable of providing up to 17,300 pounds of thrust. This engine was developed specifically for the B-2 from the F110 afterburning turbofan that powers many F-16s, some F-15s, and powered later F-14s. The F110 is, in turn, a derivative of the F101 which was developed in the late 60s/early 70s specifically for the B-1 bomber. (Interestingly, the F101 core was also developed with SNECMA of France into the immensely popular CFM56 airliner engine after discussions during multiple meetings of the French and American presidents convinced the US government to allow export of such an advanced engine component.) The F118 is also used on some U-2 spyplane variants.

I don’t see why keeping to F100/F110 isn’t a better option considering the fuel burnt will be similar. The larger dry thrust however means the engine spends less effective time under duress.