The later switch to the MiG-29 and Su-27 derivative fighters has allowed the vessels to become somewhat more versatile but they are still not perfect for the classic aircraft carrier role.

Actually I think the opposite. The Yak-41 seemed to have been designed to perform a light attack role in addition to the fighter role defending the fleet. I think the switch from a mixed squad of Yak-41s and Migs and Sukhois to just Sukhois made the Soviet and now Russian carriers less versatile, but in doing so they have made their specialisation quite clear, and quite different from the US model.

The amount of remodelling required for the Gorshkov to suit India’s needs are indicative of just how different the original role of these vessels was from that of the conventional carrier.

That really depends upon your definition of a conventional carrier. For simple fleet air defence with VSTOL aircraft the Gorshkov had a few issues but overall wasn’t that bad. It wouldn’t need much changes at all of it were to operate Harriers for example. The changes from a VSTOL to a CTOL carrier would not be any different than the changes that any other VSTOL carrier would require.

[quote]The large SSM battery of the Kuts class vessels takes up a lot of space that could otherwise be used for fuel or stores that would allow for much better sustainability of air ops.[quote]

But keeping them gives all weather day and night anti ship strike capability.