Or the PLAN decided that they have use for more 071s even with limited helicopter and/or hovercraft capabilities. I think the interesting question now is whether the PLAN is going with 4x or 6x 071s.
If we go with the CV theory that 3 ships are required in order to have 1 operational in theater at all times then the PLAN needs 6x 071s for the flashpoints in the ECS and SCS.
If we modify the theory to 2 ships required for 1 operational in theater at all times because these areas are close to China's shores the PLAN would still need a minimum of 4x 071s.
However the PLAN may find it beneficial to have additional 071s for backup in case one is sunk/damaged, or one is needed for a faraway deployment, or one is somehow needed in a scenario with the Koreas.
Taking all this into account a jump from the current 3x ships to 9x is too much but an increase to 6x ships is not out of the question unless the PLAN is building a LHD or two.
I doubt they are restarting 071 production only for one extra hull.
Going from 3 to 9 definitely isn't out of the question, considering how quickly they went from 2 052Cs to continuously producing 4 052Cs and 12 052Ds. The PLAN's number of APAR DDGs, from the beginning of 052C restart to the last 052D being commissioned, will have increased by 900% in number (from 2 to 18)
Of course, LPDs are different to surface combatants and require different crew skills and crew readiness/deployment times. So who knows.
Ultimately, I'd like a nice 9 071s and some 20 Zubrs, which would provide a solid amphibious assault capability for TW and other regional contingencies. If they can get around to building some 3-4 LHD/LHAs too, they'll probably have all the amphibious assault capability they'll ever need. But that's many years away.
---
Regarding the 3 to 1 operational ratio thing, that depends on a few factors, and it isn't a hard rule imo
-One factor is how far the theatre is from your location, for instance, you can't expect your ships to deploy constantly half way around the world without giving your crew time off at home. If we are only talking about ECS and SCS scenarios, then the relative proximity of the theatres means crew and complements can be ushered together more easily and deployed. If you want 071s to maintain a constant presence near the gulf of aden, then obviously you need more hulls to give your crew repreieve.
-Also, we have to consider the type of ship, specifically the complexity and the maintenance its subsystems need. A carrier is a more complex ship than an LPD, and I'd hazard a carrier would spend more of its life in drydock or maintenance than an LPD.
But overall, I'd say the 3:1 ratio applies mostly for sustaining a presence at long range.
For PLAN's case, if they want an LPD presence in westpac, then I think a 1.5:1 ratio or 1:1 ratio in emergencies is attainable. Afterall, they don't need their LPDs to constantly be out at sea to maintain a "presence" -- they serve as a "fleet in being" even if they're only at port in a state of normal operational readiness.
In other words, even though they "only" have 3 LPDs in service at the moment, there are definitely periods when they can put all three into action for short to medium duration operations in the near seas, and even at worst, there will probably always be at least two out of three that can be deployable to maintain physical presence in westpac.
Finally, any situation where 071s will be needed in ECS or SCS will be a short and likely high intensity conflict, not a prolonged deployment. Deployments are only necessary to project power and presence at areas where your presence wont' be felt if your ships are at port. In PLAN's case, they can project presence into westpac simply by having their ships remain at port or in its home waters -- i.e.: no need to constantly have a ship patrolling westpac.
