This is my point exactly.
What munitions and weapons could we partner with this platform and who can we work with on this?
For example for naval missions we could partner with Ukraine to integrate the Neptun cruise missile.
We’ve worked with South Africa to integrate the Raptor series of bombs.
The idea of multirole has been misunderstood. People sometimes imagine that this means that an aircraft goes into a mission, kills a2a, performs a2g, or then kills a2a and comes back home to a hurrah!
Reality is this rarely ever happens. Aircraft that are performing a2g missions, keep to that mission, while (in some cases the same model of aircraft but a separate flock of aircraft) go in for an a2a role.
So you could have a flock of a2g JF-17s, and another flock of a2a JF-17s. They could re-arm and play another role, but most often, not during the same mission.
The other issue is training. Multirole pilots spend a portion of the time doing a2a training and another portion doing a2g. Sometimes this can be an 80/20 split, and sometimes it can be a 50/50 split. And many possible splits in between.
Truth a told, a flock of pilots that train 90% and above on a2a will be better at a2a than a flock of pilots doing 50/50 training.
The point I am trying to make here is that being multirole comes at a cost. We have to decide whether "the juice is worth the squeeze".
1. Less dedication to single role reduces pilot competency in multiple roles
2. Cost of training increases sharply, and wear and tear on the aircraft also increases
3. Multirole aircraft have been a trend. There is no reason that trends cannot be reversed. Bell-bottoms were also a great trend...
Mirages dedicated to a strike role can, at low cost and with great expertise (from being single role), play a critical role very efficiently. And by efficiently we mean get the job done at the lowest cost possible.
Ideally, an airforce should have dedicated aircraft, and multirole aircraft, just like a cricket team has dedicated batsmen and ballers, and also all rounders. Having a team of all all-rounders isn't effective or efficient.
