A Shahed is only useful against stationary soft targets, which an aircraft carrier is not. It also doesn’t have the kind of heavy warhead or terminal guidance required to defeat the armored structure of naval ships. Shahed doesn’t have any kind of countermeasure avoidance. Adding these would massively increase the cost.
Naval anti-ship drones have been around for many decades. This is a highly evolved area of military technology with a long history of real-world engagements upon which to base design choices.
The standard naval anti-ship drones are Harpoon, Exocet, and similar. These are qualitatively more capable than a Shahed and you still need a swarm of them to get through.
Modern Shaheds can be controlled through satellite links like StarLink, with high quality video. Also, targeting a large pile of metal in the sea should not be difficult with something like a radar.
Any kind of radio control should be discounted when attacking a US carrier fleet, they will just be jammed.
Autonomous optically guided missiles/drones would fare better, but those are still vulnerable to being blinded by laser systems like HELIOS[0], and of course being shot down by anti air missiles or CIWS.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Energy_Laser_with_Integra...
This underestimates the requirements. It requires sophisticated real-time terminal guidance. This is not a cheap feature. Modern anti-ship drones dynamically select a precise point of impact based on their observation of the target to maximize probability of hitting a vulnerable spot. Especially with a weak warhead like the Shahed, most points of impact would be scratching the paint.
The model you are talking about was basically how things worked in the 1970s. Technology has improved a lot over the last half century.
For now only the USA has reliable access to anything like Starlink / Starshield. Radar isn't any kind of magic solution: it has limited range and field of view.