The EF and Rafale were the two most expensive aircraft in the reckoning, and arguably the least cost-effective.

Can you elaborate please?

Btw, AASM was succesfully tested on A F-16 testbed using UAI.

It goese much further. Many french poeple are going to move to India for a few years…

Indeed. But the way to do that isn’t to provide HAL with a get-out clause for any of its own failures, which is what “Dassault is liable for everything” would do.

HAL is too big for Dassault to bully into line, & is a state-owned (i.e. owned by the customer) firm, making it even more difficult for Dassault to put pressure on it. Any arrangement under which Dassault is responsible for failure to perform by HAL therefore makes it less, not more, likely that the IAF will get its aircraft, since it enables HAL to pass the buck to Dassault, while Dassault is unable to enforce HAL’s performance. The only answer is for the GoI to enforce HAL’s performance, & Dassault to be responsible for delivering everything needed for HAL to perform. That’s essentially what the page you posted above says (BTW, thanks for doing that).

But unfortunately, it seems to be being interpreted in India as “Dassault is responsible for HAL’s performance”.

Last nego round (well it should be last) stating within a week… We will see.

That’s very, very different from what Indian posters here & on other fora, & the Indian press, have been saying, which is that Dassault is refusing to take liability for the performance of HAL.

The item above is perfectly reasonable. Dassault is liable for its own actions, & any delays or problems caused by its own failures. So why are so many Indians saying that Dassault is liable for the performance of HAL? Are they all wrong?

Might it be that the GoI is trying to write into the contract a maximalist interpretation of “caused by or attributable to the OEM“, in line with what’s been claimed by Indians here, which would make Dassault potentially liable for anything & everything that HAL might do wrong after Dassault is, e.g., an hour late delivering a kit, & Dassault is disagreeing with it & insisting that it can only be liable for problems it has caused?

Complex problem. IAF want the jets. GoI wnat to insure IAF will get them…

Last negociations pre-conditionings. A bit kiddish.
Anw, NO company would accept to guarantee the work of another, except on very stringent procedures. DAssault will not guarantee HAL’s work except if HAL sticks to the letter to Dassault’s procedures. They’d prefer losing the market, risk is too high.

OMGZ, i’m killing myself repeating you that a delegation is arriving in a week for last roundtable…
take it or not;

Or they are humbly pressuring before last nego round. No idea.