@p2prada
Korea 2002? You're short on facts as usual the F/A-18 E/F was first cleared for export in 2005 - it did not participate in the Korea competition.
Ah! My bad. I guess it was the F-15. Now why would Boeing pitch in with 2 platforms. But we can say for sure that the F-15 was below Rafale and EF too. This according to the Koreans.
So far, the F/A-18 E/F has competed in India, Brazil and Japan.
You missed Malaysia, where SH lost to Su-30MKM. We have had their own officials who said even an upgraded SH with AESA will not match the MKM in many capabilities. However they did say that they still need a strike fighter like the SH and recently announced a second MRCA competition. Then there is Denmark, who chose F-35 over SH. They gave Rafale the next highest score. Greece is an old entrant and is still ongoing. UAE is a new entrant, but I am quite sure they will go for Rafale like Brazil will.
It hardly matters to me if India buys American arms or if American fighters / weapons are at the bottom every Indian evaluation, I was alluding to an established procurement pattern of the Indian MoD. India limits its procurement of offensive American weapons to niche weapons via FMS - weapons that is not available elsewhere.
While it may be true for large platforms. It does not have to be true for less critical parts, like missile components for our missile program, which does not compare to equivalent programs in the US, in Russia and in France. You can say, for our needs, all three countries can deliver what we want.
Btw, Apache was won in a proper MRCA type tender where the Russian heli lost on 20 technical points. So, come up with better excuses.
As for Raytheon and the 'Stunner' 500 million dollars is a lot of money for R&E on a missile. You can't compare Patriot to the Stunner, the 8 billion dollars you refer to is the development cost for more than the missile. A comparable program is AGM-84 or Harpoon missile which cost 300m$ to develop.
This is a PAC-3 equivalent. Raytheon is building the missile firing unit and the launcher. That may have come up to $500Million. The missile's design, seeker, propulsion, radar, support structure etc is all Israel's work. It is obvious this will go into a few Billions to develop. And no, this isn't just a missile, it is an entire SAM system with it's own battery, command & control and support structure.
Bottom line, regardless of what people like you and pack leader say the reality is Israel depends on US technology and funding across the board.
It is really simple. The missile may have been built on a certain level of US aid with a clause that some American company should be given some work. So, Raytheon won the missile firing assembly and logistics contract. That's about it. Israel may have depended on American technology and will depend on core American technology in the future as well. But when it comes to systems they are masters in, they have a thing or two to teach the Americans too. Case in point, do you believe the JHMCS is an American system? Answer: No.
The Israelis are working on Barak 8 system(equivalent to evolved sea sparrow) using Indian funds. The Russians, probably, have half their aerospace industry working on Indian money as well. You won't hear us singing about it. It is merely good business. They design, we build in our own country. Win win for both. It is your problem that you aid Israel.
... The missile for the David's Sling system is called 'Stunner' it is co-developed by Rafael and Raytheon. As for free cash, you have it backward Rafael paid Raytheon to develop this missile for them.
