Gripen has been very aggressive in chasing Indian contract, and is quite flexible on terms.
I do not see conflict with LCA as it needs time to mature. Actually size of gripen is a plus as it fits into shelters built for mig21.
I think Saab can meet timeline offered by dassault.
The commonality if any is beneficial as same line can be converted to LCA mark2 line later.
How and how much SAAB's flexibility which will benefit us is only time will tell. So far all TOT package offered to us has turned out to be hog wash.
Maturity issue is ok, i agree here. But what benefit is offers if Gripen comes couple of years before or MK-2 comes couple of years after. How much difference it will make in long run?
But i stress on high degree of tactical commonality. Besides i don't get why you can't put up another Tejas line in place of proposed Gripen line when you have such large order to fulfill.
Heavy fighters are based in interior airbases. For forward airbases, you need high sortie rate (quick turnaround time).
High quality single engine planes are ideal for filling forward airbases.
My point of stress is having stop gap arrangements till MK-2 arrives followed by AMCA.
Anyway, you have Tejas MK-1 as of now. In future there will be MK-2. And for time being you have a mix fleet of Mirage 2000, Mig-29, and Jaguar for strike missions.
Network MKI with MK-1 and you have one deadly BVR package that i don't see anything in PAF getting through.
Tejas MK-1 IOC has turnaround of less than 20 min. Which will be further brought down in MK-1A version and will be comparatively close to Gripen. And since it is our bird, fleet availability will always get better with time.