This assumes US has air superiority within 1-2 island chain and carriers are survivable in a peer war. PRC has 230x US ship building capacity and is trickling carriers because it's nice to have peace time presence/coercisve capability, but they're not betting the farm on it. They're barely betting on it at all. For reference US was dropping a big displacement carrier every year/other year post WW2. Scale that to PRC ship building capacity and they can do 2-3 a year, but instead did 2.5 in 15 years. They're deliberately not playing the carrier game. PLAN only still have 60 J15s for 2 carriers (3rd doing trials). Thats a profound lack of urgency if that's a capability they really cared about. PRC is doubling down on missiles to sink carriers and hit US regional aviation basing. They're likely assuming entire PRC / PLAN fleet going to be sunk, but also they can sink entire USN. Then it's a matter of who can play attrition and reconstitution game the fastest, that's where 230x ship building capacity comes in play. T+1-2 years AFTER war, they're betting they can spit out a fresh new navy and US can't. They're hoping that prospect deters US because US needs her navy for global hegemony and security commitments and PRC doesn't. Realistically the only threat to PRC global shipping is US doing a blockade, hence they aim to sink USN anywhere in the world by pursing conventional global strike, and third world pirates that posting some security on merchant ships can deal with.