i personally do not believe we were ever in the running...i mean did anyone really think that india was going to win against the massive nexus between their lawmakers and arms industry? that too when the lockheed martin is invested in the T50 trainers themselves?... India's bid to USA was more about making a statement of confidence to global clients-to-be...in the west, the fatc that we have made our first aircraft carrier, etc...barely makes news...well drdo did the right thing because thats how you get attention of the smaller fish in the barrell and show them that they need not compromise with chinese junk and can get close to USA without really being close...
agreed. It was a VERYYYY long shot.
Without tying up with a US manufacturer first, there is simply no way that the Naval LCA Mk1 trainer stood a chance.
Even KAI, which had already won some exports had to first tie up with LM before offering the T-50 to the USAF for their trainer requirement. Same with BAe which offered the Hawk.
And even there, despite being mature, political and industrial considerations meant that a clean sheet T-7A design between Boeing and Saab was chosen. Primarily to protect Boeing's fast jet capability which was on the way out with Super Hornet and F-15 (back then) not finding more favor. Now things have changed with export contracts for Super Hornet and the F-15QA and F-15X. Of course, Boeing's deep pockets meant that it too was able to offer the T-7A at a very low cost that even LM couldn't match.
There will be a requirement to build the trainer in the US as well..which again is not possible without a US partner. Northrop or Sierra Nevada were possible contenders but HAL doesn't seem to have made any attempts to tie up with anyone in the US to build the Naval LCA Mk1 trainer there.
So all in all, this was likely done just to please MoD bosses and political masters that HAL was trying it's best to secure exports.
) .
