Multiroles like the F-18, F-16 (excluding the original worthless LWF proposal), Su-30, Su-35, (today&#x27;s, though not the original) MiG-29 and Su-27 variants, Typhoon, Tornado, Mirage, Rafale, and nearly every fixed-wing fighter employed by every air force today definitely do not have bad histories--some less stellar than others, but none bad.<p>Multirole capability is primarily a function of the weapons an aircraft can employ. This wasn&#x27;t true in the 70s when targeting pods were binoculars and effective employment of aircraft in strike roles required decent performance in low-and-slow flight regimes, but we&#x27;ve been living with pods and PGMs coming out of our ears for 25 years now. Design tradeoffs for multiroles today are primarily those of cost and maintainability. You can pay out the ears and get larger twin-engine multiroles that strain logistics and wallets, opt for a single-engine F-16alike multirole that&#x27;ll do everything nearly as well except for flying really high and really fast, or inexplicably go Eurocanard to pay F-22 prices for sub F-35 capabilities. Anyway, the point is that it&#x27;s next to impossible not to make a multirole these days even if you&#x27;re trying; if you can employ weapons with your jet, you&#x27;re multirole.