But we can compare it with the offeres of the vendors that was reported in public and from similar competitions like Brazil.
The Rafale, the Mig and the EF are officially offered with full ToT, Gripen NG might only provide full ToT if EF is out, or the US provides agree to engine ToT, no US Gov, or Boeing/LM official has ever stated similar ammount of ToT for India, or Brazil. In Brazil the president and defense minister stated openly, that the ToT offer of F18SH was increased, but still is not comparable.
Exactly there is the problem! Not Boeing decides about ToT, EMU, or source codes, but the US Gov and they didn't even provide these things to close alleys (no source codes of F35 for UK, one of the major issus at that program now). Boeing is also ready to sell F18SH Growlers to export customers, but the US Gov won't!
Modifying with other US techs is not customising, I mean Indian, or western techs and weapons like we did with MKI.
Because it improved IAF capabilities of that time dramatically, now with AWACS all around us, low RCS is very important and that is the Achilles' heel of the MKI. Altough the F18SH will have a lower RCS than the MKI, most of the other contenders offers advantages in that area.
Can you explain how? It offers no TVC, no canards, has most likely the least t/w ratio and also the least G load:
F18SH:
Design load factor 7.6g
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/fa18ef/docs/EF_overview.pdf
Rafale:
Load +9g/-3.2g
Aircraft Characteristics
EF:
G'' limits +9/-3 ''g''
Eurofighter Typhoon - Design
Not exactly, the Rafale will use the same weapons all the upgraded Mirage 2000 can use, maybe even the weapon that the upgraded Jags will use, if they are European. Gripen NG is totally open, they even offered integration of Russian weapons to us, for more commonality. EF at least might have some commonality to Jags on the weapon side, but also highly rely on US weapons of course.
That's what I said, F18SH will be good enough for now, but the Indian carriers it might be meant for, come only at the end of the decade and with F35C on offer, the F18SH makes no real sense if IN wants a US fighter. But USN will replace nearly all of them with F35, which should tell us about the future of F18SH as a carrier fighter, don't you think?
Once again, I don't say F18SH in general is a bad fighter, but it is not the aircraft itself that makes it interesting, because the design is only slighty improved to the older one. The interesting parts are the US weapon pack (although PAF will have exactly the same) and the radar, or avionics, but will this be enough to buy this fighter to serve in IAF for the next 3 decades? And how can our industry improve, if we remain a simple buyer of F18SH, can't integrate indigenous developed techs and weapons, won't get useful ToT of radar, or avionics?
I think this makes the long term advantage of F18SH for us questionable or?
