Of course it can be, as tenders all around the world shows, but first you need government approval for the sale. Middle eastern countries as well as India doesn't have it so far.
Not even close!!! Even if we would et US approval for the sale, we wouldn'tget it even in a licence production deal similar to MKI/MMRCA/SE MMRCA. The FGFA is a partnership for the joint development of an own varient, that's a level of freedom that only Russia and Israel offer us so far.
Only an off the shelf order in flyaway condition would be possible without any ToT, or industrial advantages, that's why the US is offering us only their teen series.
You also missed the point of this tender, which is to get a more cost-effective alternative to 126 Rafales, that can be procured and deployed in numbers.
F35 is the opposite! It's costlier to procure so far, which is why most countries go for lower numbers than initially planned or required and as a stealth fighter, it's also far costlier to operate.
So even if you keep the non availability, the lack of licence production and ToT as side, it wouldn't even meet IAFs basic requirements for this tender. So F35s would only play a role if we cancel FGFA, which would be nothing short but a disaster for the national security.
Well, I can understand the reasoning below when IAF and IN were initially appraoched by LM, it was 5-7 years ago, when F-35 was faced with lengthy delays and the issues list was big. As for affordability the F-35 shouldn't be an issue since it will more or less be priced competitively to other 4.5 gen aircraft,& if we are looking to equip the IN/IAF and the order numbers are well over a 100. I say if orders are placed for deliveries commencing 2023-24, the flyaway cost should be in the range of 100-120 million. Looking at deal values for Soko, they were offered 60 F-35 for 10.8 Billion including service costs, soft dev./integration etc. They eventually bought 40 for just under $7 billion which puts the total cost at $175 million per. This whole idea that it would be more expensive when part of it could be assembled in India under medium TOT conditions is naive. Many of the F-35 buyers have local assembly, to think in this day and age, local assembly with decent TOT is not available to India is silly, especially when IN & IAF orders combined would easily make us the second largest operator of the F-35 after the US. Also if we want a level of freedom, we could simply ask for a modifed Israeli version anyways.
Sure, buying the F-35 won't be a joint devlopment case much like FGFA deal which currently is walking a fine line since my understaing is that for PAKFA we ask for full-tot while the Russians aren't keen on this. Also Indian version of the aircraft would need 43 improvments over the base PAKFA, when are we to get these fighters? Timelines aren't clear at all. 127 fighters are expected to cost $25 billion which would put it in the same price range as the F-35. Now I do understand that full-tot is nice to have but experience suggests such implementations are full of inefficiencies when working with Russians, every such deal including MKI, T-90 has such problems. If the deal continues to be delayed, stalled, then not sure if it will go through.
An F-35 purchase for India benefits only if acquired for IN and IAF, i.e 5 sqds (90-100 F-35A) for next gen SEF and 57-60 for IN(Combo of 30 F-35 C and 27-30 F-35B). 30 F-35C can go for the IAC-2 while 27-30 F-35B play a role a dual role based on land while working from INS Vikky and IAC-1 as well as from the future 4 LPDs (if San Anotnio Class LPD is acquired). Such aipower is always useful especially for Marine Infantry Ops. LPD deploying the F-35 would effectively turm them into mini carriers with formidable force projection as and when needed. F--35 brings commonality, industrial benefits, flexibility in Ops; especially for the Navy. It also brings an overall good mix of technology, capability and fire power.
