(Prowlus) wrote in message . com...
What does it mean nowadays with the introduction of multirole fighters
. Does it mean :

(1) An aircraft tasked with destroying other enemy aircraft ie Tornado
F.3

(2) An aircraft that is tasked with destroying enemy military hardware
including: SAM sites, AA Guns , tanks and other aircraft on the ground
or in the air IE most of the USAF/USN fastjet tactical inventory with
the exception of the A-10

Has the term become diluted over the years to mean an aircraft that
can destroy most GENERAL militery hardware?

These days, "fighter" usually means "A single or dual-seat fast mover
capable or at least originally designed in some variant or other for
reasonably effectively performing an air superiority or intercept
mission, regardless of what else it can do" the reasonably-effectively
part translating into "at least mach 1, carries air-to-air missiles,
and ideally supersonic with a air-intercept radar" and the "what else"
usually being strike, recon, and SEAD.

There are instances when an aircraft receives a fighter *designation*
for unusual reasons (the F-117), but these are anomalies. Also F-111,
which was supposed to be a fighter but didn't work out as one, and
such.

Also, USAF tactical aviation doesn't like calling anything an "attack"
aircraft so aside from the A-10 (clearly not a real modern fighter,
being subsonic, even if it can carry a few sidewinders!) we get things
like F-105 ("It's a fighter because it's got a gun and is supersonic,
even if it's not used as one"). The Harrier and such get in the way a
bit, but Sea Harrier at least has an air-intercept radar, while the
other types are more attack aircraft