So if the IAF orders no LCA Mk. IIs, fails to extend the MMRCA order, fails to extend the FGFA order, and fails to induct AMCA, then it will have a shortfall against an arbitrary number of squadrons first mooted 30 years ago. :rolleyes:

As for AMCA, it should be put on hold until the powers that be can work out a proper national strategy for the aircraft, one that includes a credible and funded pathway to a domestic engine as well as provisions for a future carrier compatibility to meet the long-term needs of the Navy. Until then, there is plenty of other design work to be done, and experience to be gained, e.g. UAVs.

the next Brazilian Aircraf Carrier (about 50-60.000 ton.)

Where are you getting this from?

No money I assume.

No single percentage figure is going to capture anything meaningful about what exactly is proposed regarding technology transfer, local production, etc. “60% local production!” is the sort of claim fit for an advert, not a contract. SAAB is currently pitching “100% technology transfer!!!” to Indonesia — who knows what that means? Certainly it doesn’t actually mean that 100% of Gripen technology is on offer, because a lot of it isn’t within SAAB’s power to transfer in the first place. About the only thing we can say with confidence is that SAAB is offering Indonesia the option of some level of technology transfer and indigenous production/assembly (which is actually quite newsworthy in itself). Back to Brazil, one can only hope and assume that Brazil’s evaluation and negotiating teams probed into SAAB’s proposal rather carefully at the time, and that today they are satisfied with the contract that has been agreed upon.

Something we might speculate is that there was a trade-off between the level of indigenous production in initial aircraft batches, and delivery timeframes. As LowObservable points out, this trade-off could’ve been mitigated or avoided by making a decision earlier.

F-22: 0

The only scenario which really makes sense is if we assume that this is a long term aim, to be achieved long in the future when an indigenised Brazilian model of Gripen has been developed – partly paid for by Argentina. 😀 But what will Argentina do in the meantime?

The present agreement is likely akin to nations signing up to the JSF program in early 2000s. What Argentina is buying into is participation of its industry in Brazilian development and production plans. The precise manifestation of end products for Argentine Air Force is is a matter left to the future. If a de-Britished Gripen is not available or practicable in the necessary timeframe, another Kfir-esque purchase of second-hand aircraft will be made to bump things along a few years until it is. The long-term picture will be little affected.

I wonder if SAAB has considered WS-13 as an alternative powerplant for Gripen, and whether China would permit it given that Gripen is more or less in competition with JF-17.

Yes, SAAB has now sold Gripen C/D & E to five countries (& it would have been six, but for the Swiss referendum), none of which have bought Swedish fighters before. They’ve won over long-established customers of France & the USA. That’s quite impressive.

With any luck that list of clients should double over the next decade.