I want to know everyone's opinion. what is the best/most versatile multi-role/multi-purpose fighter jet? I know that I think the F-16 is the most versatile jet of them all, yet I also think that the United States "Super Hornet" jet is even better.

Currently, the F-16 and F/A-18 are the best, but the new F-35 Joint Strike Fighter(JSF) is going to be very good. It will have vertical takeoff, and versions will be custom tailored to each branch of service (i.e. the Navy version will have carrier landing abilities).

The F-15E Strike Eagle with it's Lantrin pod, huge weapon load, speed and proven in it's high performance is my favorite. If we were to engage a highly technical enemy. My bet would be on the F-22 which is stealthy and can be fitted with Ground to Air munitions.

if war deteriorates into contest of attrition, I'll buy harriers, thank you

All they need for lift-off is a field in size of daisy-cutter blast

In Response To:
[quote]The F-15E Strike Eagle with it's Lantrin pod, huge weapon load, speed and proven in it's high performance is my favorite. If we were to engage a highly technical enemy. My bet would be on the F-22 which is stealthy and can be fitted with Ground to Air munitions.[/quote]

Don't you mean Air to Ground munitions, because you would be striking a target on the ground?????

Fortunately, the Harrier will be replaced by the V/STOL variant of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, but the Harrier does make a good multi-role Attack aircraft.

The F-22 doesn't strike me as multi-role, because, while it can load bombs, one of the critical role played by aircraft is that of Close-air support (CAS). The F-22 will primarily carry guided weapons, and that is not exactly a close support kind of thing. Right now, I will have t go with the general consensus of the F-16 and F/A-18. Both of these aircraft are capable of carrying surprisingly large loads, and, especially in the case of Marine Corps F/A-18's, their primary training is in CAS.

I would have to say the F-16 because it can do anything and its not ridiculosly expensive. Another good one is the British Panavia Tornado

Definatly the Su-37 Terminator

I would have to say the JSF, F-18 or F-22 with pgbm's Precicion Guided BoMbs. The SU-37 is nothing but a prototype and a air to air fighter, not a multi role

su-37 is a fighter, not multirole id say f-35 or f-18

right now the f-18 super hornet is by far the best but i think the f-35 lightningII will be better.

f 16, and f-18 are the best multi role fighters right now. The JSF, and f-22 are way to expensive. If i went to war i would rather have numbers of great jets like the f 16, rather than a few f-22s, or some prototypes, like the Su-37.

I'm Canadian and the CF-188 Hornet which is currently our milti-role fighter. Out was I saw it is more then enough and is probably one of the best jets out there. I know the JSF (F-35)Canada was the second to sign. So maybe we can see Canada purchasing 100 or so? I know our government said that the CF-188 are currently being modified to serve until at least 2015. Hopefully the Liberals won't come in power and mess our once very powerful military up.... again.

i'm not familar with the canadian military or canadian politics. what exactly have the liberals done to mess up your once powerful military?

TCU,

Multirole is a misnomer since no fighter which is configured for ground attack is able to fly the mission profile which will let it be optimally survivable let alone dominant in the air to air role and no 'pure' fighter (at least those not VLO'd or heavily EA supported) can survive a sophisticated IADS environment.

What generally ends up happening is that the DCA threat which has the advantage of operating over a friendly ADGE (passive vector), will pull your section vector apart and use their superior energy (closer bases as well as cleaner airframes) to get first pole, after which you get to choose between dumping everything and making your best break into a defensive fight or eating missile.

Weasels can be slightly more flexible than bombers here but even they are highly dependent on jammer and ferret assets to gain enough of a rollback and EOB targeting effect to put the DEAD shots into envelope, first. Again, despite what you may have heard, HARM can be beaten back and while heavily loaded and dragging an ALE-50 bird, F-16CJs have been pushed /so far down/ by remote CG SA-2/3 shots that they in fact are below the 10K ft limit at which they are effectively 'safe' from the trashfire envelope. And well beyond effective HARM countershot chicken victory.

Once this happens, any 'multirole' loaded aircraft depending on the suppressive screen to ingress lose their protection and it's a free for all into which threat air can easily be inserted to really mix things up. This happened several times over OAFian Kosovo, at night, and once left a hole so wide that a MiG-21 got to play tag with an F-117 for several (5-15 depending on the story) minutes before it was shot off.

The essence of 'multirole' is in fact closer to /swing role/ where platforms that are not immediately needed for a given task can be cross missioned to secondary ones as an ease to the burden of mission planning and logistics in the daily frag order (who comes from what base dictates a lot of tanker patterns).

In this, both the F-16 and F/A-18 are cripples for payload:range and range or more specifically radius + loiter is what buys you time in the target area sufficient to be worth the wasted hours you took subsonically getting there.

There is no really easy answer here except to say that modern tactics and increasingly weaponeering depend on offboard cues to get somebodies aperture looking in the right direction in a sufficiently timely manner as to narrow the TLE graze and get a weapon off the airplane from beyond the ballistic limits currently possible with PGMs based on ballistic ordnance.

Thus an F-16 with a Sniper pod and X8 SDB is ten times as capable as an F-16 with LANTIRN and a pair of opposed GBU-12/GBU-38. Just as an F/A-18F with ATFLIR and JSOW will overmatch an F/A-18C with GBU-16 (bring back is key here).

Soon, people will realize that this shooter:illuminator trick is so enormous an advantage that the only route forward for the defenses is to go to hunting weapons systems (i.e. SAMs and AAMs with microturbines replacing manned fighters) and then the tables will turn again as missiles the size of a small decoy (say 6ft and 300lbs) able to be launched from catapults on the back of 2 ton trucks will have ranges on the order of 250nm and be able to make multiple pass attacks with pack coordination using their own seekers to find targets.

At that point 'multirole' will come down to who has the diode pumped laser to slap multiple threat weapons out of the air with because the turbosam will cost less than an AMRAAM and subsonic targets below about 60-70K will be completely dominated by it.

The potential DEW (and the shaft drive to power it) option of the F-35 is just about the only 'good thing' about the JSF program as a whole.


CJ

Swedish SAAB JAS 39 Griffin was the first 4:e generation aircraft in service and has been so for 12 years now.
It is a multiroll aircraft and can take any kind of ammunition, though it is small it may not take as much as an f/a 18.
It is a STOL aircraft built to be able to take off/land and refuel on common roads.
In my oppinion all of the above mentioned aircrafts are very good except then maybe for the Russian made cause they are just hoplessly outdated and lowtech and therefore not able to fit as one of the best today, a great piece of engineering on that SU-37 though.