I wonder if things would have been more successful if France hadn't broken away from what went to become the Eurofighter program? Perhaps then you would have seen a European fighter that cracked the 1000 acft mark...
I think it certainly would have been close if it didn't meet or exceed it. With Aircraft sales "the rich get richer" The more you sell, the lower the cost, the better the sustainment and logistics -- upgrades become more palatable as well. The less you sell the more expensive to buy the more rare and expensive they are to maintain.
Had they stuck with together you are looking at over 800, maybe more deals in the middle east, south america, africa. at the very least you turn it into "US vs Europe" in western contests, it would actually tilt the scales. instead there is a lot of duplication of effort and one winning somewhere doesn't help much.
What if land is fun
Maybe a joint euro Fighter from the 1980s gen 4.5? Carrier version and land based version? maybe even include a "lightweight version" with a single (but same) engine, similiar cockpit, radar avionics, so you offer the "lite" version (gripen like) to those who can't afford the regular land version?
One of the reasons Norway did not opt for the Gripen NG was the idea that Saab may be out of the airplane business in 15-20 years, thus making them the owner of some very expensive collectors items, despite the advantages the NG may have offered.
Honestly Europe missed their shot. The idea of the EU coming together to create an F-35 competitor is incomprehensible to me at least. Its about getting as many eurocanards offloaded until the end now. unless they try a 5.5 gen fighter in the future, but there would have to be a serious perception of a need for such an airplane and the willingness to come together, pool resources, and stay together. and many nations will have already spent billions on F-35s that are expected to last for decades.
I wonder, has anybody done a Eurofighter in French colours?
Now that would be funny