I'll separate the OP from the ensuing convo.
OP : The reason why Commodore Maolonkar's stance makes sense is not the impossibility
to co-develop a carrier based aircraft with a land based one. The Rafale was made this way.
But the Rafale was built with carrier in mind from inception so that the accompanying requi-
rements came first. The delta wing was adapted through canards and FCS from the onset
in order to achieve a sufficiently low landing speed. The "sacrifices" related to naval environ-
ment were there first if you prefer, including that amazing energy restituting front landing gear.
Then, the land based design got to save weight off which allowed for the two-seater version
easily. AF Rafales kept a "legacy" arresting hook if not the full-sized one of their "wet bros".
The two sides of the program were not competing. Marine first, land variant second adapted
from it and so gains trickling in instead of later problems surfacing
( very appropriate wording 
)!
The real reason pertains to India's lack of volume expertise in designing jets. Makers from
the West benefited from a bygone era in prototyping now defunct. That meant building planes
within something of a trial and error engineering position that went down to single protos and
now concurrency, both of which correlate to a sink or swim design agenda. Though now gone,
that period ( at minima 1945-1985 ) gave the surviving design bureaus a data-backed experi-
mental bagage that just can't be duplicated.
Since the discussion is about real naval ACs, I withheld Russia that did not go CATOBAR &
thus managed to derive jump planes instead.
In short, naval planes are indeed a different breed and those made as afterthoughts show it!
CONVO : I don't mind reading the wanton for F-35s of some Bharatis but I disagree for EMALS.
Build one proper CATOBAR carrier and you'll be able to count yourself lucky! As said before,
the Russians even as CCCP never could and no one else has recently. The Brits could have
and lost it to Prolicuticalment disease ( conflation & entanglement of politics and procurements ).
The Chinese haven't yet. In fact, do research how many nations designed and built a CATOBAR
carrier in the last 30 years ( since 1986? ), the answer will surprise you. Then go back s'more!!!
EMALS as of now is not a significant advantage over steam cats! It will be if and when it reaches
a deck
* but for now, just having catapults would be an immense gain over the rest of the gang.
Walk before you can run. Faceplants cost less at lower speeds? I see the bad trait of wishing
upon a star that India is so prone to in that dream. It is not necessary; save yourself the aches?
And please forget the F-35 B! Don't copy our Brit friends on that ( same proliticuticalment mess as above! ).
Besides, primo the F-35 B is not based on realities that India faces despite its past use of jump jets.
Some very knowledgeable people in America even doubt it is based on reality for the USMC itself.
You guys will not build temporary beach front property ( deployable landing pads ) anytime soon,
most likely not even by the end of service of an indigenous CATOBAR carrier. Go for the Lightning II C
if you must have the JSF.
Secundo, there is the maintenance aspect linked to so-called 5th gen. Stealth is very maintenance inten-
sive; in a naval environment, even more so! Present state of things in India's mil avia industry literally
forbids going for it. Not only is the budget inspired / development woes compounded slacking of LRIP
telling us that additional clients of the F-35 may be served late ( and later than unrealistic expectations )
but the major maintenance will NOT be done in India until 2050 at least ... if it was ever allowed anyhow.
Not only would you thus incur life-threatening headaches going that route but it will rob your design teams
of hands-on learning from it. As of now, demonstrated abilities make this a foregone conclusion.
That's it! I'll avoid giving a replacement option to avoid some of the anger filled "fanboyism" certain to follow.
Pick anything you want but make that pick a logic and reason based one not a wet dreams one ( pun intended ).
Saphalatā, Tay.
* There are development issues with the EMALS that may have escaped some folks' attention.
