In the 1980's, the Argentinian navy used an airgroup comprised by Super Etendards (Since ¿1983?), Skyhawks, S-2 Trackers and SH-3 Skyhawks from the carrier ARA V-2 25 de Mayo, even though it had been unable to use it during the Falklands war, because of the great threat posed by british SSNs, the lack of proper naval strike aircraft to conduct anti-surface sorties in open ocean against the Sea Dart defended british task force, and last but not least, the poor maintenance condition of the carrier, since in fact, argentinian naval planes (4 A-4 loaded with bombs IIRC, supported by two Super Etendard armed with one Exocet each flying from Rio Gallegos airbase ashore) launched from the aging light carrier could have made one of the first actions of the war, just after the first Black Buck mission and before ARA General Belgrano was torpedoed, and thus entering in the first carrier vs carrier combat since World War 2, had they had enough wind over deck and had the ship been able to mantain greater sustained speeds. The integration of the powerful Super Etendard in the aircraft carrier combat system was too late for the war, and in spite of the fact the carrier proved useless and stopped sailing by 1988, they decided to launch a program (Although of arguable realism) for a substitute aircraft carrier (V-3) that should displace no more than 25000 tons ¿light, standard? (In order to be able to built and perform maintenance works in existing argentinian yards), retaining naval fighter units without a carrier platform that should be able to operate from the future carrier.
Thus, both designs (B/SAC-200 and B/SAC-220) were mainly focused on Argentinian and/or Brazilian requirements. In the 90's both navies, specially first, sought, or apparently sought to replace their aging Colossus class light carriers. Argentinians had also some limitations when to think about a brand new light aircraft carrier: Some european navies like the Royal Navy and Spanish and Italian Navies solved the CVLs compact size limitations relying on STOVL fighter solutions, which had in turn their own advantages and disadvantages, but this wasn't an option for Argentina since any kind of Harrier aircraft were Rolls-Royce powered, and, as we said, existing aircraft should be able to operate from the carrier too. Of course i'm afraid neither Super Etendard nor Skyhawks were powerful enough to operate using a Skyjump ramp (Like in the STOBAR designs), and much less with their best ASuW capabilities, besides the fact that a ~25000 t CV would offer a cramped flight deck for take-off runs. Hence STOBAR solution (First of all a solution specially suited for soviet navy needs in the Cold War, and with much larger warships) wasn't feasible.
This "new CVLs" would be in fact a reedition of the aging Colossus and Majestic class carriers, fitted with a single catapult (By the 90's the only model available in the market was the american C13-1 of 75 meters, necessary to launch futurible planes in the argentinian navy as well such as the F/A-18 or others), with minimum speed to fit for the role, restricted range and endurance and without the combat sortie generation capability (Airgroup, aircraft fuel, aircraft weapons, etcetera) of a large attack aircraft carrier, but able to perform air defence for a task force, ASW missions, amphibious support or punctual strike. SAC-200 was the most adapted to argentinian requirements; SAC-220 was a slightly larger derivative with twin catapults (The problem in this case being that meant twice volume for the catapult systems), and we can speculate that it may had been actually larger than the published 27k tons.
The feeding system for the C13 catapults posed another problem for these pocket CATOBARs. US or french CVNs obtained steam from nuclear powerplants. Former american, french and british CVA and CVLs obtained steam from their powerplant based on high pressure boilers and steam turbines. But the SAC-200/220 carrier used the more efficient gas turbine (LM-2500) as powerplant. It seems that a procedure to obtain steam injecting water in hot air exhausted by the gas turbines was studied, but it would have been so complicated and the conservadure approach for completion would have been to install a boiler plant exclusively dedicated to serve the catapult(s); Hence consuming additional internal volume for the boilers themselves and shrinking AVGAS and ammunition stores... Small size matters and impose severe limitations.
Argentinian V-3 project AFAIK was never officialy approved by the government and Brazilian navy obtained french carrier Foch some years later. I doubt the SAC-200/220 specially adapted for argentinian needs could have been a serious option for the PLAN. It's quite normal they were more interested in the design than in purchasing the carrier itself.
In the end, of course, we can only speculate, as V-3 program was never officialy launched. But had they been built, and had not been for argentinian requisites, the obvious solution would have been a larger-sized carrier. I don't know if Bazan/Izar/Navantia had larger carrier designs.
Regarding the B/SAC-180, i'm pretty sure it could be the company designation for the Principe de Asturias class carrier, or the adapted SCS design. Numbers in this case would make reference to WL lengths.
