Disagree ..
Actually the game is almost running on wrong side
The Tejas yet to get the BVR capability, and some other EW suites, So ADA brings another concept in the Tejas in the name of MK1A ..this will give enough time to ADA to study further on missile integration on Tejas, and they ADA advertising as AESA makes the MK1A superior, Reality is IAF need a better Tejas with EW suites and BVR.
The MK2 concept is almost over, its the navy only currently active on that Program, since IAF skipped into AMCA
No, it's not.
BVR testing has already begun. First unguided launch was to test safe separation. Next phase of tests will aim at guided launchs. Then there will be validation trials with PTA as target.
Thing is, there is series of tests to carry out and it will spread over entire 2016 and will be carried out on priority basis. Since Derby's integration with ELTA MMR is not even an issue let alone any challenge, it is waste of time if someone is worrying over BVR.
EW suit comprises of RWR, MAWS, Counter measure dispensers and a SPJ. And of these, MK-1 has everything except MAWS and SPJ. But hey, MK-1 can always carry a SPJ on special pod mount paylon that is there under port side air intake. EL/L - 8212 which is there on BIS models of Mig-21s is the the preferred choice. Again, its integration won't even be an issue, because Tejas has open architecture and HAL has experience in its integration on Mig-21 bis.
Only question that lingers, is whether to go for a pod mount option --thereby engaging an station in this case one which usually carries a EL/OP-- or hard mount it on wing tips in MK-1As? But so much of time has passed since this question was in the open media. I am sure they must have reached to a decision by now.
LSP-7 is already under going modification for installation of IFR. In July ground tests will begin. Post monsoon will see in flight tests and trials.
Isreali AESA mmr will be a game changer. Considering MK-1A will be first IAF jet fighter to have active AESA.
Sum total of all that has been said above is.
# Work on MK-1A is going a pace. MK-1A is the best model or version possible of MK-1 type. And good enough for low penetration strike, forward level action and in the role fighter interceptor.
# MK-2 IAF with 0.5 m longer fugelage was a waste of time, efforts and money. It was an ill conceived proposal. IAF was thinking that just a powerful engine will give performance they like. But unanswered question was what about extra fuel load that will be needed? Its good that it has been buried. By reducing weight and through design optimization, HAL is giving IAF, MK-2 kind of performance in MK-1 with MK-1A. Mind you Naval MK-2 with 1.2 m longer fugelage is very much a new design. In contrast IAF MK-2 was just a re-engined version.
# IAF can try skip LCA and try to jump to AMCA straight. But by doing so it will only display its naivness in understanding a development process. You can sit in B.Tech finals without getting through +2 board exam, can you? Crude analogy! Yeah. But put it in contrast with Navy. Navy knows, LCA won't be deployed on INS Vishal. Best figure Navy will order won't exceed 100. Yet it is supporting program so much so that it ordered 8 MK-1s just to stabilize its production. Went on to get a almost new design in MK-2. Definitely Navy knows that no skyscraper can be erected without putting necessary foundation. I could go so far to say, without a naval program LCA program would have been dead.
And yeah let IAF skip and jump. After all it is doing it since Marut days. So much for IAF's want for control over air assets of sister services.
But I believe during the MMRCA evaluation the EFT and Rafale beats the F 18
Doesn't matter! In face of upcoming chinese 5th gen fighters non is frontline.
So what we do? Get value for money deal. Rafale is ridiculously costly. SH is cheap. SH has future in ASH, Rafale has none. SH engine is same as NLCA MK-2, hence good bargain on TOT, better product support for fleet (considering HAL will be producing F-414). Since AMCA will fly too on F-414, nothing could be better than SH at this point.
Bottomline.
As long as PAF or/and PLAAF does/do not acquire Rafale, (again) it does not matter who has beaten whome.