But a prospective PAK-FA-K would be like a next generation F-18 with a better and more powerfull engine then what the F-18 Super Hornet currently have in it, plus even in dynamics PAK-FA-K and F-18SH is compirable
PAK FA is bigger. We will be able to get fit lesser PAK FA in a carrier as compared to number of F35. Plus PAK FA is being built for air superiority role. CATOBAR carriers housing 50-60 aircraft are typically meant for strike operations rather than air defence. Hence it makes sense to buy a strike aircraft such as F35 or Rafale-M. Btw, I don't understand the fixation with PAK FA. Its not like its our aircraft.But a prospective PAK-FA-K would be like a next generation F-18 with a better and more powerfull engine then what the F-18 Super Hornet currently have in it, plus even in dynamics PAK-FA-K and F-18SH is compirable
PAK-FA is not larger to F-18 SH which was specifically made for carrier operations
It is slightly larger. And the difference will become more pronounced when both fold their wings. Anyways, we are talking about F35 here.PAK-FA is not larger to F-18 SH which was specifically made for carrier operations
So what are u trying to say?
It is not such that it is 1 cm shorter or longer then the other but literally both share same dimension for the requirement, next a carrier is designed with aircraft it will operate on it in mind (INS Vikramadatya
is an expection) so size of PAK-FA wond matter if requirement arise. Historically it is seen that India have not put her money on US, while in the other hand India is a partner of PAK-FA 
....I mean FGFA 
development ... where India definitely have put her money in its devepolment
Size will always matter. Bigger the size, lesser the number you can fit. Where did you get that aircraft carriers are built with aircraft in mind? Has Brazil chosen which aircraft will be used on its carrier?It is not such that it is 1 cm shorter or longer then the other but literally both share same dimension for the requirement, next a carrier is designed with aircraft it will operate on it in mind (INS Vikramadatya
Next Mig-29K might be a tiny aircraft, but for a power projection 65k ton plus Aircraft carrier, it can be a pain in the available deck space with its limited capabilities
Defence projects fail all around the world. It is simply unreasonable to expect all of them to succeed. Anyways, unless you have got something to say on the topic.......
Huh??????????@Defcon1 do you really think an aircraft carrier is just another boat with a modified deck to add on air stip to launch an aircraft
Dude did you even get the point I was making? Anyways google Brahmos 3. Thats will satisfy your ultra nationalistic self.Home Made BrahMos are way better then SCALP for peacetime mission and humitarian operation
Aircraft carriers are designed with mind about the prospective aircrafts it might operate, park and hangered, obviously the are not designed to honour a Boieng 747 but they are designed that an aircraft of a definite size and dimension can be operated from there
so an aircraft carrier designed to operate aircaft size of SH or T-50K should have no problem operating them, so their size wont be an disadvantage for carrier Ops.
Where did I say that they will have problem operating them. I am simply saying that you can house lesser number of bigger aircraft on a carrier.Aircraft carriers are designed with mind about the prospective aircrafts it might operate, park and hangered, obviously the are not designed to honour a Boieng 747 but they are designed that an aircraft of a definite size and dimension can be operated from there
You must know offensive foreign import weapons are not without strings attached, feel free to acknowledge if their is a communication problem in laungage then stating my debate as Ultra or something.
