True fighters (not attack/multi-role) that were carrier based besides the F-14/F-8?

I'm helping with a sub mod for the Millennium Dawn mod for the strategy game Hearts of Iron IV and am looking to make a carrier fighter tech tree.

Currently the F-14 is in the 'multi-role' tech tree and this causes a problem with the F-18's -insert long story-. (I know the F-14D late in her career would be considered multi-role)

So among planes that were active from 1970 to the 2000's, besides the F-8 and the Tomcat, what NATO/Warsaw planes were pure fighters/interceptors?

Was there a variant of the F-4 that was air to air only? Do all versions of the Mig-29K and SU-33 have multi-role capability? Was there an air to air only Sea Harrier?

Thanks for any help :thumbup:

Unfortunately from what I have read what you're looking for is almost nonexistent. The whole point of most of our modern fleet is to maintain cost effectiveness and ease. Why have a carrier deck covered with 20 different aircraft for different roles when you will undoubtedly have to bring along parts and trained crew to work on those aircraft. Even some of the earliest models of the f-14 could carry air to ground ordnance just not good stuff. I think as far as this is concerned you have the only ones. there are plenty of air to air capable aircraft we have used but we have developed the hornet as a multi role jet because we only need one type jet to cover CAP, CAS, SEAD, EW, and Interceptor, and just about any other role we need. if you could expand into the air force that would grow the list a little, but even our dogfighter (F-16) is multi-role.

Some of the WWII aircraft were A2A only, but pretty much everything modern(ish) carrier based is multirole.

I just wanted to make sure I didn't miss any, my cursory research wasn't turning any up and I knew I could get good feedback here.

Yeah, such is the needs of carrier air wings that multi-role makes the most sense. I'll go with those two and can easily add any later if needed.

Thanks

If you look back at the fighters that the Navy had developed during the 60's through the 80's, I would say that the Grumman F11F Tiger, the McDonneld F3H Deamon and the Douglas F4D Skyray were all designed as a pure fighter. Of course, any hardpoint is just as good for a drop tank as it is for a bomb and the Navy learned their lesson in WWII and Korea, that a fighter that can carry a good bomb load is just as, if not more valuable than a purpose built attack plane. I think that the big discriminator is the targeting systems/bomb sight that was non existant or rudimentary at best in the afore mentioned fighters as opposed to the F/A-18 or F-16.

Even the F-8 was used in A2G roles, just not as often..and mostly with the USMC.

So among planes that were active from 1970 to the 2000's, besides the F-8 and the Tomcat, what NATO/Warsaw planes were pure fighters/interceptors?

You might have to look at Specific Units. What I mean if that AFAIK, there where many versions of aircraft on that time period with varying capabilities, but some unit only trained for a specific task. So a particular aircraft might have been capable of many missions but a specific combat unit may have specialize in a specific missions like Air Defense or Intercept.

 

So among planes that were active from 1970 to the 2000's, besides the F-8 and the Tomcat, what NATO/Warsaw planes were pure fighters/interceptors?

For carrier capable "Warsaw" aircraft none - even the old Yak-38 had ground-attack capability.

Do all versions of the Mig-29K and SU-33 have multi-role capability?

The MiG-29K(both the old test version from late eighties and the current version) is a true multirole fighter like the F-18. So in fact was the Yak-141 supposed to be if it had materialised. By "true multirole" I mean the ability to conduct various mission types: anti-ship, anti-radar(SEAD) and ground attack with a range of guided missiles/bombs.

So I guess the closest you can come to a pure fighter is the Su-33, which is primarily an air-dominance asset, but it does have a limited(unguided munitions only) ground attack capability.

I'm helping with a sub mod for the Millennium Dawn mod for the strategy game Hearts of Iron IV and am looking to make a carrier fighter tech tree.

 

Currently the F-14 is in the 'multi-role' tech tree and this causes a problem with the F-18's -insert long story-. (I know the F-14D late in her career would be considered multi-role)

 

So among planes that were active from 1970 to the 2000's, besides the F-8 and the Tomcat, what NATO/Warsaw planes were pure fighters/interceptors?

 

Was there a variant of the F-4 that was air to air only? Do all versions of the Mig-29K and SU-33 have multi-role capability? Was there an air to air only Sea Harrier?

 

Thanks for any help :thumbup:

Tecnically speaking While F8 Crusader was known and designed as a Fighter/Interceptor, It too has secondary ground attack capabilities. The hard points can hold Rocket pods or a couple of bombs. The F8E for Example can also carry th Agm12 Bullpop Air to ground Radio control guided missile.

I recall also watching a documentary on the F8 that Marine Corps F8s regularly flew equipped Lau rocket pods, utilizing it for the Close Air support Mission in Vietnam.

AS well there are a few images on the net that have US flown crusaders carrying ordinance

This is a F8E crusader which was also capable of carrying the Agm12 Bullpop

Thing is even before the term MUltirole was coined, in the COld war many aircraft were Capable of functioning as fighter bombers, even some that were designed primarily for A2A in mind. The amount of Pure Bred Fighters is pretty small.

MIg25 & 31 Were dedicated High speed interceptors. Perhaps that is a option for the Soviets for your mod in HO4. . Im not sure which versions were mulirole capable if at all, but I did read a book " Iran/Iraq wAR by Pierre Razoux, which i recal detailied that Iraqi Mig25s were modded to have bombing capabilities because all other aircraft in their inventory ( save for dedicated bombers like the Tu16 or Tu22) lacked the range to carry out long range bombing missions into Tehran.

I don't know how much you can tinker with, but certainly there were squadrons that did better at AA than AG and vice Versa. Take the f4 for example - you could have one squadron who excel at AG work and another that are better at AA?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yak-141 ? (Yak-41)

Only a few prototypes built, but it flew, and the technology lives on in the F-35..

Cooperation with Lockheed[edit]

 

Following the announcement by the CIS on September 1991 that it could no longer fund development of the Yak-41M, Yakovlev entered into discussions with several foreign partners who could help fund the program. Lockheed Corporation, which was in the process of developing the X-35 for the US Joint Strike Fighter program, stepped forward, and with their assistance 48-2 was displayed at the Farnborough Airshow in September 1992. Yakovlev announced that they had reached an agreement with Lockheed for funds of $385 to $400 million for three new prototypes and an additional static test aircraft to test improvements in design and avionics. Planned modifications for the proposed Yak-41M included an increase in STOL weight to 21,500 kg (47,400 lb). One of the prototypes would have been a dual-control trainer. Though no longer flyable, both 48-2 and 48-3 were exhibited at the 1993 Moscow airshow. The partnership began in late 1991, though it was not publicly revealed by Yakovlev until 6 September 1992, and was not revealed by Lockheed until June 1994.[9]

Lots of good info here, hope someone else can also make use of all this too.

Currently the mod is set to start in 2000, but the next version will go back to 1991. Even though there aren't many A2A only CV aircraft, I'm still giving that category it's own tech tree. The mod will also give the squadrons their correct names aka VF-101 'Grim Reapers', as the base game just gives them a default name like 'squadron 1'.

I did not know the F-8 did A2G though. Thanks for all this info guys.

Lots of good info here, hope someone else can also make use of all this too.

 

Currently the mod is set to start in 2000, but the next version will go back to 1991. Even though there aren't many A2A only CV aircraft, I'm still giving that category it's own tech tree. The mod will also give the squadrons their correct names aka VF-101 'Grim Reapers', as the base game just gives them a default name like 'squadron 1'.

 

I did not know the F-8 did A2G though. Thanks for all this info guys.

Yeah..the Crusader just wasn't great at it..

Yak-141 ? (Yak-41)

What about it Weta?. He was asking about carrier capable "pure fighters"(air-to-air only). The Yak-141 was not only A/G capable, but intended as a true multirole fighter using the same radar(N010 Zhuk) as the MiG-29K and same range of weaponry.

Only a few prototypes built

IIRC two flying prototypes and two static test airframes.

..but it flew

It did....and set several records for VSTOL aircraft in the process :) .

2 things about it -

1/ Lockheed bought the rights to the tech & used it in the F-35 - which is interesting in itself, but agreed, maybe slightly OT here,

2/ The Great Oracle Wiki says : The requirement was for an aircraft with only one mission: air defense of the fleet, so it was intended as a fighter, not multi-role, and that sounds like it's exactly what the thread's about.

(Maybe you're thinking Yak-38 ? Yak-38 was VTOL & Multi-role.)

2/ The Great Oracle Wiki says : The requirement was for an aircraft with only one mission: air defense of the fleet, so it was intended as a fighter, not multi-role, and that sounds like it's exactly what the thread's about.

Its hogwash Weta.

The Yak-141(or Yak-41M if you like) was developed as a true multirole fighter - like I said, it was to be fitted with the N010 Zhuk radar(with air-to-surface modes) and in addition to air-to-air armament(R-77, R-27 and R-73) capable of deploying anti-ship missiles like the Kh-31A and Kh-35 as well as anti-radar missiles.

(Maybe you're thinking Yak-38 ? Yak-38 was VTOL & Multi-role.)

No I am not. The Yak-38 was not "multirole" - it could carry unguided bombs and rockets only.

See that's not what I find...

This says same radar N010 as early MiG-29s but with a smaller dish - that makes it an A2A fighter that can chuck in a bit of unguided A2G.

MiG-29 didn't get A2G modes till the N019 in the MiG-29SMT in 1998.

Yak41 flew in 1990 & was at Farnborough in '92.

Too early for the N019.

The Yak-41M featured a tricycle landing gear arrangement along the lines of that of the Yak-38. It was armed with a built-in GSh-6-30 six-barreled Gatling-type 30 millimeter cannon and had four underwing stores pylons, with a total stores capacity of 1,000 kilograms (2,200 pounds). That was a fairly modest warload for a strike aircraft, but its primary role was intended to be air combat, with strike as a secondary function.

 

YAKOVLEV YAK-41M FREESTYLE:

_____________________ _________________ _______________________

 

spec metric english

_____________________ _________________ _______________________

 

wingspan 10.1 meters 33 feet 2 inches

wing area 31.7 sq_meters 341 sq_feet

length 18.3 meters 60 feet

height 5 meters 16 feet 5 inches

 

empty weight 11,650 kilograms 25,690 pounds

MTO weight 19,500 kilograms 43,000 pounds

 

max speed at altitude 1,850 KPH 1,150 MPH / 1,000 KT

service ceiling 15,500 meters 50,850 feet

range 1,400 kilometers 870 MI / 755 NMI

_____________________ _________________ _______________________

 

The Yak-41M featured much more modern technology in every respect than the Yak-38. About a quarter of its empty weight was composite assemblies. It also featured an advanced avionics suite, including Zhuk Doppler radar, like that used on the MiG-29 but with a smaller antenna; a digital fire-control system linked to the radar and a helmet-mounted sight; a modernized navigation system; and a digital fly-by-wire flight control system. The flight control system performed diagnostics on the machine and would not permit takeoff if a serious failure was found. It would auto-eject the pilot if a failure occurred in flight, and the main engine nozzle was 30 degrees below the horizontal.

Compared to the Yak-38, the Yak-41 could carry much more armament and fuel; it also had more efficient engines, and was designed from the outset with short takeoffs in mind, giving it much better range and endurance. Although a Russian website claimed it was the "world's first supersonic VTOL aircraft", that was nonsense, since the German VJ101 and French Mirage III-V VTOL fighters had broken Mach 1 two decades earlier. However, the Yak-41 was still no slouch, setting a dozen flight records for its class. The machine was designated the "Yak-141" for the record-breaking flights -- the Soviets liked to change the designations of aircraft for establishing international records as a security measure -- and that was the designation by which it was known in the West for some time.

Unfortunately, since the Red Navy was acquiring real aircraft carriers and was obtaining carrier-based versions of the high-performance Su-27 and MiG-29 fighters, the Yak-41 was gradually eclipsed, and the entire program collapsed along with the fall of the Soviet Union. A projected two-seater, the "Yak-41UB", was never built.

How well the Yak-41 would have worked in operational service is an interesting question with no clear answer. From the looks and description of the thing, it was arguably a generation ahead of the Harrier. There are tales that Lockheed Martin consulted the Yak organization in 1995 for data to help build the VTOL version of what would become the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

See that's not what I find...

This says same radar N010 as early MiG-29s but with a smaller dish - that makes it an A2A fighter that can chuck in a bit of unguided A2G.

Weta - the N010 Zhuk was never in the baseline MiG-29. It was developed in the eighties for the MiG-29M(9.15) and MiG-29K(9.31) . It was a much more advanced set than the N019 - with planar slotted array antenna and several air-to-surface modes(photo attached). Its correct that in the Yak-141 it had an antenna of reduced diameter(due to smaller radome), but it was the same radar as early MiG-29K. :) .

You really need to find better sources.