yeah, but ordering f-18s was out of question as the Rafale was to replace the Crusaders by the mid-90’s. The problem, so to speak, w s that the french government cut defence budgets after the collapse of eastern bloc and therefore had no cash to order new aircraft , which resulted in slowing the development fundings and delaying orders of Rafales. If they’d had the fundings, they would’ve ordered the Rafale in the early 90’s and it would’ve been delivered about the mid-90’s as Crusader replacement (A2A configuration)

yes i agree.
but we are talking about a skipping scenario.

So in one case, France buys M2K and skips Rafale to build a stealth fighter in the late 90s/early 2000s.
This could work well, but the problem is the Navy because they really needed Rafale.
The argument by some is that F-18s would not come in time, but we now know CdG was already available before the F-8s were retired.
so in that case, the Navy could have used the F-18s while waiting for a hypothetical 5th gen aircraft.

F-8 has been retired because despite all the works to keep it flyable it became dangerous to fly. Several broke in flight because of airframe fatigue. several airframes had over 1000 carrier landings

actually you misunderstood.
CdG was already out before the F-8s were retired. that means had the Navy ordered F-18Cs, they would’ve gotten it before the F-8s were retired.

IIRC the Mirage III/V/50 was in production alongside the Etendard IV, Jaguar, Super Etendard & even Mirage 2000. The Mirage F1 overlapped with the Mirage III/V/50, Jaguar, Super Etendard & 2000. Jaguar & Super Etendard overlapped. The 2000 overlapped with the Rafale. I don’t think there was a time France didn’t have at least two combat aircraft building until the Mirage 2000 line closed.

indeed, there were a lot of overlaps in the generations. aside from the French nationalists above, it’s clear to everyone.
the overlaps were okay in the early cold war when budgets were bigger and plane lifecycles were shorter.. but it doesnt work in the post cold war

From the design and manufacturing perspective, there is quite a bit of tribal knowledge which would be lost by “skipping a generation”. While Rafale would likely still have been built if M2000 was skipped, it would have been a difficult struggle since the F1 designers of the mid 1960s would have retired by the 1990s. Without an experienced design and manufacturing team, the new team would have to re-learn past lessons which walked out the door with the retirees. If you want a real life example of inexperienced design team and difficult, protracted development, look at Tejas.

From F-16 first flight to X-35 first flight. 24 years

assuming the same time frame
from Mirage 2000, Dassault would have flown their 5th gen prototype in 2002. possibly entering service now
between that, the M2K would’ve seen far more upgrades and new variants that were being held back by the Rafale which has sold poorly

From the design and manufacturing perspective, there is quite a bit of tribal knowledge which would be lost by “skipping a generation”. While Rafale would likely still have been built if M2000 was skipped, it would have been a difficult struggle since the F1 designers of the mid 1960s would have retired by the 1990s. Without an experienced design and manufacturing team, the new team would have to re-learn past lessons which walked out the door with the retirees. If you want a real life example of inexperienced design team and difficult, protracted development, look at Tejas.

what if, they skipped the rafale instead. it would be skipping half a generation.
RD resources would focus on more advanced M2k upgrades while they build an actual 5th gen design.

What to buy? That is also related to munitions and equipment available for sale to the respective aircraft. If everything that could be put on the aircraft would be available, and a full envelope of capabilities is desired, then F-16 is an obvious choice.

It has AIM-120D capability, can carry cruise missiles with up to 600km range, compatible with most up-to-date targeting pods, which in turn gives ALL types of current and currently planned A-G munitions (be it laser-tv-autopilot-gps guided bomb or missile). Also F-16 has many operators, thousands of aircraft actively flying means it will still get upgrade packages from LM, Raytheon etc to stay up to date 15 years later. I cannot foresee a modern munition to see widespread use in western countries without it integrated (by whoever) to F-16.

Those would the prime reasons MiG-29, Mirage 2000 J-10 are strictly out of the question. Mirage 2000 is gone, Rafale replaced it. There is no truly up-to-date M2k flying today, and there won’t be any “modern” m2k in 10 years timeframe. MiG-29/35 is a capable aircraft, but cannot simply be equipped with all equivalents of payloads and pods available to F-16. J-10 cannot carry even what is available to MiG-35, and not as well proven as the others.

Then why F-16 over F-18C?

-Less operating costs.
-Better kinematics and range.

IF, however, such flexibility in capability is not desired nor available (and is likely not to be) MiG-29/35 can be a better choice; simply because Russian equipment tend to come with less strings attached.

For example, even to a friendly country like Iraq, US didn’t gave AIM-120 compatability at all. They didn’t gave AIM-9X or JDAMs or any other modern munitions.. Buying an F-16 with mere AIM-9M and mostly dumb bombs is a joke. Paying for the targeting pod (but not allowed lowlight navigation pod), JHMCS and all the other gizmos on blk52 but being denied the munitions that would actually use them is an insult… I would have bought a some second hand MiG-23MLD and some Su-24M before accepting that.

interesting answer.

on the j-10 it seems it can’t do much a2g on the other thread. maybe you should look at the jf-17 instead. Pakistan put some serious efforts in expanding its arsenal to include a variety of ashms and guided bombs, etc

F16C block?

block 40 and 50.

at block 60, it starts competing more with the Rafale.

that said, Mspherical made a good point.
The existence of the Rafale made future upgrades to the M2k (to match the newest F-16s and Fulcrums) unneeded.

Come to think of it. Dassault is interesting in that they made both a dedicated 4th gen airframe and a 4.5 gen airframe.
I can see the Brits and Germans needing Typhoon since they never made their own 4th gen multi-role aircraft, but France was ahead of the game.
I like Rafale by itself, but when looking at the overall timeline.. would much rather France stuck to M2k (maybe M4k).. buying American for their carriers. and then producing a true 5th gen airframe. OR.. stick with the F.1 longer until the 2000s, then go Rafale, and skip M2k.

oh wells. c’est lavie