woh woh woh lol you have asked to many questions lol Ok ill try to answer them
The MKI's higher LCC cost is mainly again due to the additional cost that are incurred because of the many additional components that the IAF installs on the MKI. Parts on an aircraft follow the following life cycle -
Now you would think changing one small part on a jet would be cheap right, wrong it is one of the most complex procedures in aviation. These are the steps that must be taken even if you want to change one switch on a jet like the MKI or even perform routine maintenance -
As you can see that cost management is a huge field in itself. If buying a jet was so easy and cheap, every Air force would be able to maintain huge numbers but its the long term price and parts constraints that limit how much you can buy. Cost are divided into two distinct phases -
Both phases carry heavy cost and that is the reason why Countries try to reduce the first phase to reduce cost, this is done by employing a technique we all call Transfer of Technology. In terms of the MKI, India has a good share of the cost but because of the amount of technology that goes into these jets, cost will always remain high. The MKI is by far the best version of the SU-30 and if we want to continue with that spending such amounts on the MKI is needed.
The LCA is a local development which again goes back to the whole reducing Phase 1 cost. Refer back to my previous post to look at where cost are incurred. By developing Aircraft's in house, we cut down cost on the first 4 terms of the SDLC cycle which in turn results in a better LCC curve. Parts of the LCA can be procured from anywhere but the cost of concepts, design, implementation and change management remains with us.
The MKI is for sure capable of entering Chinese airspace but the Chinese are also well equipped and will give it a fight, entering anyone's airspace is never easy my friend but that is a totally different issue and topic.
Hope that answered your questions.