The Naval version is still in a kind of feasibility study phase. There is no decision taken on this matter. If decided, the airframe and wing area will probably not be the same. It will likely be presented as a highly derivated aircraft that will remain within the maximum common logistics and production sections. The name Hurjet is a somewhat historical reference(see Vecihi Hürkuş) and a metaphor(Hür means independent) that represents freedom in aviation. Therefore, if I need to give an example from naval projects, it may be the main name of the program, not an end product, just like MILGEM. If we assume that these further steps will be taken.
I am pretty sure you understand that once you touch airframe, wing, engines (I think you even suggested that Hurjet could be equipped with a twin-engine in the future, but the change would make the development even more challenging) and other critical designs of the jet, you may have to take many, if not all, steps you have already taken for designing aircraft even if you recycle some parts from the current Hurjet. It will almost as if Turkey is designing a new jet and the project will take time, money and manpower to get the job done properly. For instance, Saab was ordered to build a Gripen Demo powered by F414 in 2007 to expolore possible upgrades for Gripen C/D, but only completed the first flight of Gripen E in 2017. And this is Saab which had many years of experience in building fighter jets even in 2007, not TAI which has comparatively little experience to Saab of 2007 in designing & building a manned turbofan fighter jet aircraft. So I think it is disingenuous and dishonest for Aircraft Programs Manager of TAI to suggest that 'Hurjet' could be deployed on amphibious ships.
Hurjet is a trainer and isn't meant to be a proper fighter jet replacement. A major overhaul is needed to be operated as proper carrier-based aircraft and it would be expensive, time-consuming and skill-intensive. Even if the projet was somehow successful, by the time it was done, TF-X would be either only a few years away from being combat ready or achieve at least FF.
the company tends to use any possibility that will affect the risk sharing and sale success of the Hurjet projects.
Actually That is a concern. It seems like profit-motivated TAI is a) suggesting that Hurjet which is only meant to be an advanced trainer & light attacker as a proper replacement for carrier-based aircraft (F-35B) or b) making the Turkish navy to wait for years until the compnay properly develops a new 'Hurjet' so they could sell more stuffs to the Turkish navy even when TF-X would be available only within a few years and it'd be better to develop the naval version of TF-X along with the actual TF-X.
If a) is true, TAI is suggesting a trainer & light attacker which is not meant to be a full-blown combat aircraft as a proper replacement for carrier-based aircraft (F-35B).
If b) is true, maybe TAI is not actually confident with the TF-X project of being completed on time and is interested in selling Hurjet variants as an interim solution to Turkish Armed Forces.
Either ways, for now, the design looks rock-solid...as an advanced trainer. It would be interesting to see how this thing (Hurjet), T-7A Red Hawk and Airbus Spain's new advanced trainer jet fare against each other in the export market as a new generation of advanced trainers.
One more interesting point - I believe TCG Anadolu has a ski-jump, but is more suitable for V/STOL aircraft. Turkey may have to install the catapult & hook system, if the ship doesn't already have one, to increase the take-off speed of whatever indigeous aircraft that would be deployed on the ship, but not sure how effective the change would be since the deck (particularly the length) may not be ideal, especially for landing. Very intriguing situation.
