Just to be the devil’s advocate for once, lets lay down a few facts;

1. China is yet to start building an aircraft carrier, and in spite of their long term strategic thinking, is years (if not decades) away from gaining required strength (in terms of aircraft carriers).
2. For future US foreign (China containment) policy, it is imperative that India joins a US/Japan/Australia naval coalition.

Knowing the above, what it is the likelihood that a chinese admiral would suggest something of the nature (with or without his tongue in cheek)…considering the exisiting trust levels between US and Chinese navy, he would be a damn stupid. Second, even if so, why on earth did this have to come out in open during a conversation between US and Indian naval officials? Is US trying to warn India because….?

Tell me what the LCA MK1 has over the planned LCA that it is overweight and requiers a new powerplant.

I think this is a good point.
We know that LCA was designed keeping in mind the original requirements of IAF. We know, according to the original ASR, its empty weight was meant to be 5,500kg. Some would say that its is overweight due to modified requirements and some would argue that it is because of extra safety margins. So any idea what extra stuff has gone into LCA compared to its original requirements?

See, by 2015 only 8-10 MRCAs will have been introduced in the IAF (as first 8 have to be delivered off-shelf). The same will be the case with the Tejas Mk.2 also.

Back to Square 1:)
Once again, the most fundamental difference between every other MMRCA contender and LCA is that whareas every other MMRCA contender is based on a proven (in service) design (and hence a number of operational problems every fighter encounters to start with have been debugged) LCA is yet to enter operational service. In a few months time, the field trials would start and would continue for quite a while. Would MK.2 be there to compete or would you compare its theoretical qualities against other MMRCA competitors? A physically existing product is different from a paper product. Is that too hard to understand? Even the notoriously nationalist BR forum does not have that many buyers of LCA in MMRCA competition theory.:) In addition, We all know that whereas by 2015 every other MRCAs contender could be introduced in the IAF in required number, you cannot say the same thing for MK.2 with similar levels of certainty regardless of what Mr X, Y, Z has said-read previous history.

I think it’s a waste of time considering it but why not? It will be excluded from selection immediately, won’t it?

Precisely.

Now I have another question for anyone who thinks LCA should have been a contender i this MRCA competition. While i pesonally do agree that The Tejas delays are the main reason for the MRCA competition, have the developers/builders of LCA ever insisted (officially) on its inclusion in MRCA competition?

Sign, the above is inaccurate. As per 2 former top officials of the services in India — Rear-Admiral (retd) Mr. Raman Puri (Chief of Integrated Defence Staff to the Chairman, Committee of Service Chiefs) and former Science Advisor to the Indian Govt. Mr. Ashok Parthasarthy — Tejas is a 4.5 G fighter plane.

Tejas’ avionics like latest Litening target pod, quadruplex FBW, Tarang RWR (same as in Su-30 MKI), ELTA radar, air-air & air-ground secure datalinks, HMDS, etc. are equivalent to those found in other 4.5 G fighter jets like F-16 Sufa, Gripen-NG, and Typhoon.

Tejas will also be equipped with weapons like A2A and A2G missiles (mostly of Russian origin) and precision guided munitions. With the exception of nuclear warheads and heavy cruise missiles, Tejas can carry ANY type of conventional weapon, and that too in the same quantity as the Gripen and F-16.

Due to the above reasons, Tejas is a full-fledged 4.5 generation fighter jet.

They why is it not a contender for MRCA?

Regarding your statement, Due to the above reasons, Tejas is a full-fledged 4.5 generation fighter jet. which one of the above avionics/weapons have already been integrated, tested, certified and proven for Tejas?

Oh no i do not want war anymore than you do. Its just the hypothesis that PAF stands a chance, like always it will stop giving airsupport and save itself.

Throughout history war waging countires have always prospered. Greeks, Romans, Persians, British, Americans. I think the ambition of countries like China India Brazil etc is just too much for them to remain entirely peaceful.

I know for certain that most of these countries will behave much worse if ever they are left in the current American position ( not likely )

Just one advice.
Please remove the footnote from your posts, i.e. To underestimate your enemy is the biggest mistake.🙂

LCA should have been inducted in its present form as a replacement for some of the oldeset Mig-21s. IAF should have then asked for the development of LCA-mk2 version and this could have been included in MRCA competition, though it wouldn’t have had a chance of winning when one takes a look at some of the competitors.