@schrage musik I know why you are angry. I too was expecting a 380m long behemoth behemoth by 2030, not a puny 285m cutter.
No, it is because I don't like this carrier program at all. IMO it is a collosal waste of funding and I'd rather they put these resources into other programs. e.g. develop a larger frigate with 64 VLS cells and a larger variant of the STM-500 submarine. Then buy at least 12 of each instead of the carrier.
My rationale behind this is that the carrier cannot be expected to remain undetected in the Mediterranean sea where maritime patrol aircraft or AEW&C planes could track it even from coastal or inland airspace. And it cannot even be expected to remain in the black sea, aegean or red seas during a conflict. So what is the point of this ship when Turkey doesn't even have enough naval vessels to achieve sea control over its surrounding seas yet?
If they instead procured the 24 frigates and submarines, it would add a minimum of 12x64 = 768 VLS cells, plus 96-192 SSM tubes (8x12=96 or 16x12=192) on the ships and another 100 or so sub launch tubes. This is a serious land strike capability. And 12 frigates can provide a more survivable and wider fleet air defence cover than a single token carrier.
So yes, i'm kinda disappointed they are moving forward with the carrier because it means funding will not go to other programs that I was hoping to see in the future.
I will add that if flattop capability is required then developing a LHD with EMALS that is around 30-40k tons like a smaller 076 type platform would be sufficient for power projection. You could buy 2-3 of these for the cost of a single carrier. However, what has been revealed about the design of the turkish carrier untill now doesn't seem to suggest such a design is in the works.