* dumbstruck:

OK, it's a tie. Industry sources voted for the "proven" legacy
fighters from the first line, and internet voters favored the mostly
newfangled ones from second line. It's left to me to break the tie,
and I say to leapfrog a generation and go UCAV.

UCAV still can't fully replace manned aircrafts.

If "unmanned combat air vehicle" sounds too bleeding-edge, then go
for the MiG Skat which retains the option of a cockpit
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...D&channel=null

Settling on a project that even doesn't have reached the stage of a
flying prototype probably isn't a good idea.

Besides the fact that this means being fully dependent on Russian politics.

If mainstream is desired (something that should be sort of a cousin
to Saab Gripen) go for the Dassault nEUROn
http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/neuron/

Did you even *read* the text?

"Neuron is the European Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) demonstrator
for the development, integration and validation of UCAV technologies and
is not for military operational deployment."

But best of all may be the EADS Barracuda, which apparently doesn't
work due to software problems.

Nope. EADS Barracuda doesn't work because they sunk the thing into the
Sea. Barracuda llike Neuron also was a demonstrator and not a finished
product ready for prime time. The next EADS UCAV demonstrator project is
already in the planning stage but will be a multinational project with
France and Italy. If this project doesn't get dropped it will probably
take 5+ years until we see some results and probably a decade until
production.

Then it's probably better to wait for results from the BAE Taranis UCAV
program.

India's strength in that area might
bring it back to life and furthermore conquer the problem of making a
drone effective in interception as well as strike or spy mode.
http://www.air-attack.com/page/75/Barracuda.html

This won't happen for obvious reasons.

Benjamin