For most of the PRC’s history, it did. This is where India, with its greater access to global markets, has an advantage. Tejas is not coming at the expense of more capable platforms, those are in the pipeline as well. Frankly I don’t think China is as far ahead (in terms of planned/fielded capabilities, not self-sufficiency) as you seem to think they are. MMRCA is taking its time, but the closest PLAAF equivalent to Rafale is J-10B and that isn’t in production yet either.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating – JH-7, J-10, J-20, J-31 are all either in service or flying prototypes. India has Tejas which is only meant to enter service this year and then in an interim capability in small numbers (i.e. 40 Tejas Mk I).

Chinese are also advancing with indigenous transports (Y-20), trainers (K-8, JL-9, L-15). India is importing American, Swiss and British aircraft to meet these needs.

The only area where both have relative equal indigenous capability is light helos and then both have had foreign help (German and French/Russian).

One of India’s major problems is that they didn’t follow through and build upon the work done with HF-24, etc., which meant that they basically had to start over again with Tejas. And now you’re proposing they pull the plug again, enshrining foreign dependence for another generation. Certainly the Indian effort has been haphazard and problems continue to the current day, the thing to do is fix those problems, not abandon the endeavour.

HAL had continued design work throughout 1970s and the LCA program began in 1983.

The question is what is the product of that indigenous product – Tejas certainly doesn’t sound worth it. By the time it enters service in meaningful numbers it will be obsolete. As stated it’s kind of like building T-55s to tackle M1A2s.

FGFA is tinkering around the edges.

In 2020, F-35 will be ahead of other competitors, but its still 20 year old technology.

But then compare to a Rafale or even PAK FA?

Characterizing the 1956 war as a “US led coalition” seems a rather embarassing claim to make.

Never said 1956 was a US led coalition.

In 2013 France and Britain lack any capability (or political mandate) to do a 1956-style operation, especially as Egypt has a larger conventional force (their air force is roughly equivalent in size to UK and France combined).

The idea is a 1956 style take over of Suez. It would have to be a US led operation as only US has this kind of capability in 2013.

AMCA is a long way off. Right now MRCA is still another 5 years off.

Basically India is looking at still acquiring large numbers of 4th generation fighters in 2020s (Rafale and Tejas). This is fine against Pakistan whose air force is stagnant and is facing terminal decline in terms of numbers of advanced aircraft available between now and 2020.

But India wants to be a big power and it views China as a competitor. By 2020s China will be acquiring large numbers of 5th generation jets (J-20/J-31) and not 4th generation light fighters ala Tejas.

India starts getting 5th generation in 2022 (FGFA) provided everything goes according to plan and then only 144 airframes. In essence 5th generation will be a silver bullet fleet for most of 2020s.

Big powers offer massive numerical and technological overkill capability over lesser countries – India won’t do this over other powers in terms of technology e.g. Arabs or SE Asia (e.g. Singapore and Australia are both in on F-35 procurement) and domestic defence requirements mean its high end “silver bullet fleet” will probably be India and reserved for domestic defence.

The real argument is “defence need/want” versus “industrial need/want.” The two get blurred in modern military procurement and these days “industrial need/want” tends to win out. Though in India pseudo-Socialist obsession with self sufficiency has always pushed the industrial need/want.

F-35 works as a replacement for MiG-27, Jaguar and as a naval jet. In fact it would appear that the F-35 is the ideal replacement in the interdictor/strike role whilst PAK FA handles air superiority.

P.S. I don’t like the F-35 – ugly little F-22 wannabe. But it serves a purpose.

Disadvantages:
1. High priced fighter with capability limitations when compared to the F-35s of the other nations (USA won’t export high value technology to India)

Hence I said 2020-2030 period. If F-35 program continues

2. Limitations in the field operations of the F-35 (comes with strings attached)

Not stopping them acquiring AH-64 and P-8.

3. No transfer of technology

Can be negotiated.

4. More prone to embargoes

True, though with Russian aircraft they’ve already suffered this during 1990s due to poor spares support which equates to roughly same thing.

5. Reduction of jobs due to the cancellation of Tejas (even with local F-35 assembly/production)

True but this is small fry (Indian population is 1 billion people).

6. Destruction of the aerospace industry’s capacity to design aircraft

The Indians are doing a good job of this themselves – e.g. Indian Air Force wants Swiss PC-7 Mk IIs and not HAL HTT-40s.

7. Eventual cancellation of AMCA and Pak Fa due to US pressure

Speculation. India is not Israel. UK and Italy continued with Eurofighter despite being part of F-35 program.

In Iraq I read that a Super Hornet loaded with bombs splashes a fighter and continued on to drop his load.

It wasn’t a Super Hornet. It was “legacy” F/A-18Cs in 1991 and it was 2 F/A-18s shooting down 2 MiG-21s. No F/A-18E/Fs in existence at that time. Ironically same unit lost an F/A-18C to an Iraqi MiG-25.

Most US multirole jets can do this – standard load outs for F-15E or F-16 usually includes self defence AMRAAMS.