[Tenega]

The real practical strategic value of China’s carrier may be to improve the survivability of the PRC’s ballistic missile subs. That was the intended use of the Russian-version Varyag. Even though relatively small, it could provide anti-air and anti-sub patrols to give more credibility to China’s nuclear deterrent threat.

[tanknetter]

The real practical strategic value of China’s carrier may be to improve the survivability of the PRC’s ballistic missile subs. That was the intended use of the Russian-version Varyag. Even though relatively small, it could provide anti-air and anti-sub patrols to give more credibility to China’s nuclear deterrent threat.

Yes, that's pretty much it. Remember that the purpose of the Soviet carrier fleet was to protect the surface and submarine fleet that would deny US/NATO control of the seas. The carrier's aircraft (Forgers on the Kievs, Su-33s on the Kuznetsovs) wasn't meant as an offensive, power-projection capability, but a defensive one. Given a land war in Europe, US/NATO had to control the sea lanes ... all the Soviets had to do was deny them that control.

This is underscored by the fact that the Kuznetsov class, of which the ChiComs have Varyag - the second ship, had a surface to surface missile farm in the MIDDLE of the forward flight deck/launching area.

Apparently the ChiComs wanted the missile silos gone (since they weren't able to acquire the missiles to put into them) to free up space. And found out that the silos were structural in nature and couldn't just be cut out without compromising hull integrity. So they're still going to be there, just empty, when Varyag puts to sea.