yes, politics is good but so far most of Vietnam’s modern non-Russian purchases are from “middle” powers [….]
things that show that they take their defense seriously but not wanting to scream to China “hey we’re allying with your main nemeses”.

I think Vietnam could become to India what Pakistan is to China; that’s the main reason I would advocate Tejas over other lightweight contenders. As for upsetting the Chinese, hit up Google to see recent level of Indo-Vietnamese cooperation, particularly in naval activities. I think it’s safe to say Beijing knows what’s going on.

China […] has drastically increased Military Spending.

China’s military spending has merely kept pace with economic growth. In contrast to certain other nations one could name.

Tejas is not a good option for them, but Gripen fits. Saab has the technical skills to integrate R-73 and R-77 into the Gripen.

Why is Tejas not a good option? Maturity? Could be a problem, depends how urgently the aircraft is required. I would expect Mk. 2 to be exportable around 2020.

A lease of Gripens could make sense in the interim; the main disadvantage of Gripen for Vietnam is that it lacks the diplomatic bonuses of Tejas or F/A-50 or surplus F-16s.

There is no way that they are getting 8 missiles, let alone 6

No, no, no, no, no! Should be something like “there’s no way to fit even six missiles, let alone eight.”

Next you’ll be saying that you could care less. 😮

No catapults from the start, provisions made under the deck for future EM catapults in pos. 4 and 5. Or so I’ve heard…

This seems a reasonable solution to the steam vs. EM catapult conundrum looming for developing carrier nations.

MiG-29/35 is too big to be worth procuring vs. simply adding more Flankers which wouldn’t need new logistics chain, training regimen, etc.

For a light combat aircraft there’s always the YAK ATTACK if US platforms/systems are not available/acceptable; VPAF has already ordered Yak-130 for trainer purposes. Mind you I think folks are underestimating the rapprochement in US-Vietnam relations these past few years and no reason to think that won’t continue. I think India’s Tejas would be an ideal complement to the Flanker force: cheaper than Gripen and would reinforce growing Indo-Vietnamese ties, plus (I assume) better compatibility with Russian munitions.

+ Two regiment : Mig-21Bis/UBM (927th – 929th )
Note : I’ve heard rumour ” Mig-21’s fleet will replaced by ex-F-16A/B ( USAF) “:cool:

These deals are awful. Get a ‘free’ overworked airframe and pay only for upgrades, munitions, training, fuel… in the end you save little vs. buying new aircraft and have to go hunting for replacements barely a decade down the line, only this time with partial vendor lock-in from previous F-16 operation (which of course is the main point of the exercise from US perspective).

Better to pay a little more for low-hour Gripens or (ROK) T-50s or Tejas.

Yeah, I think Vietnam is likely to be the first T-50 operator outside Russia and India. That’s at least a decade away tho.

I doubt many countries would want the Gripen as their main fighter [….] Mostly countries buy big fighters to recive more range, endurance and weapon carrying. Mabye the Gripen NG could make country’s want that new advanced Gripen?

The historical record demonstrates otherwise: smaller aircraft are much more popular than larger ones, single engine preferred. F-16 is perhaps the most pertinent example. Gripen NG is in the same class as most of the F-16s in service today — the F-16 before it became fat, slow, and ugly. Recall also that one of the reasons the F-20 project wasn’t funded is because the US was concerned that it would cannibalise the F-16 market — that many prospective F-16 customers would consider an aircraft even smaller if one were available. Gripen is the next-generation F-20, and Gripen NG is the next-generation F-16.