I think Russia strategy is a wrong one.. Russia military Industry is very slow and inefficient and will never catch US NAvy size in a vis vs vis..
Having a US sized Navy would be pointless for Russia... they could not afford a navy that size and would have no use for such a navy.... in every regard except SSBN where they will have a navy comparable to the US navy SSBNs.
CHina already surpassed Russia navy in destroyers and Frigates.
Many Asian countries have small fishing boats in numbers that far outnumber any European western country... they are dreadfully inefficient at catching fish and delivering them to market.
For sure Russia have better weapons...the point however is that Russia small navy can be reduced to half in just any small conflict in no time by an airforce. Money that they could have better spend in an Powerful tactical Airforce.
A powerful airforce did not defeat Vietnam, nor did it defeat Somali rebels... and it has not defeated any country as far as I know on its own.
Russia has maritime territory it has to defend and patrol and an air force is not efficient at such things.
It is much cheaper and easier to send a small group of ships to sail anywhere in the world than it is to send aircraft anywhere on the planet.
Warships are nice shor show of power.. but they are very vulnerable to Air force today. Whats good about a Gorshkov Frigate if can be overwhelmed by 10 cheap patrol boats firing anti-ship missiles at the same time or simply a fishing boat or a mine.
Those ten cheap patrol boats are rather more vulnerable to that Frigate than vice versa. Air threats are taken seriously by the Russian Navy... the air defence missiles carried by the Gorshkov will not be S-300 based... they will be S-400 based... with a 32 tube launcher that Gorshkov Frigate... on its own has the equivalent of 128 S-400 60km and 150km range high performance SAMs... personally I think it is the Air Force that is in trouble... most enemy air forces are not that sophisticated anyway... 2-3 Gorshkovs sailing down to the Falklands facing Argentinas 200 A-4 Skyhawks and Mirage F-5s would clean the skies fairly rapidly.
Even Syria customized Migs-23 to launch Yakhonts supersonic will be a very dangerous weapon to any modern warship.
A Mig-23 would have no where to hang a Yakhont missile.
History is full of examples of cheap planes that fly under the radar with an anti-ship missile to sink a powerful warship. 1 hit ,1 kill. like Falklands wars.
No it isn't. Falklands is about the only example and shows why a decent air craft carrier with decent fixed wing fighter aircraft and AEW aircraft are necessary.
Flying low and fast is no longer sufficient, with modern ships having air defences most cities of the 1980s would be envious of.
The Gorshkov or any other warship from any nation can be overwhelmed and will not survive a salvo attack of just 5-10 planes flying under the radar in a massive attack of a couple of dozens of anti-ship missiles at same time..
The Gorshkov with its Poliment radar and Redut missile battery should be able to defeat up to 12 targets at one time on its own with missiles alone. Add more ships and you add more ready to launch missiles and more sensors to detect targets earlier.
If you want to lose half your air force trying to take out a Frigate then you are welcome to try but I rather think you are under estimating the ships and over estimating the planes in this case.
Also very vulnerable to mines or simply scuba divers in Underwater bikes ,carrying a bomb.
In comparison aircraft are incredibly vulnerable to direct attack on airfields as shown in Sri Lanka.
It will be far Better for Russia to focus instead its Resources and money on Modernizing its Airforce and increasing its size dramatically. .
Size in self defeating, but modernising their Air Force is a very good idea and exactly what they are doing.
So increasing its Industrial Capacity and getting a dozen of stealth Bomber like PAK-DA ,or better design a Hypersonic very high altitude Bomber that could fly 32km altitude or more and change course at will , will make very challenging to intercept them by any system of defense in the world .
The plan is not to copy the US and build 20 flying wings. They will want at least 100-150 PAK DAs eventually to replace their Tu-95s, Tu-160s, and Tu-22M3s. They will not build 150 PAK DAs in the next ten years... they will build them over the next 40 years and use them to replace the older aircraft as they retire.
I don't see the point of for example of having a ballistic Submarine if you can launch the same missile from Russia land on a mobile transport.
Modern satellites can keep track of truck sized objects 24/7.
SSBNs on the other hand can sail under the arctic ice sheet while there is one and no satellite can track it.
Instead of making very vulnerable warships ,that are very slow ,takes days if not weeks to deploy them for the desired place of conflict..
Sometimes it benefits the world when politicians are forced to wait a few days before they can launch missile strikes on their enemies...
Much better to replace the navy with a power modern Air force that could reach any place in a couple of hours.
The primary job of the Russian navy is coastal defence and anti poaching anti smuggling anti drug running operations... many of which include the use of air power but few of which could be handled by air power alone.
Also creating military Airbases in zones of potential future conflict that they have interest will significantly decrease the need for very long range bombers or even the need for aircraft carriers.Which is another mistake. Having Military Airports in Nations like Egypt ,Syria , IRAN persian Gulf (close to Saudi Arabia) ,Venezuela , Vietnam.. Will Dramatically Increase Russia projection capabilities and be in any part of the world withing 2 hours. ,without the need build a very expensive very vulnerable navy ,with a cheap plane like a Tu-22 armed with hypersonic nuclear or conventional missiles.
A single aircraft carrier offers the same flexibility as a base in all those places, yet there is no chance of an election taking place where Russian aircraft are asked to leave the carrier.
Having Russian bases in all those regions would be good and help improve relations with those countries... but they aren't going to happen overnight.
So for example Russia cancel any new submarine.or Big warship and focus all its resources in building a massive Airforce of tactical stealth bombers by building a stealth version of Tu-22 and TU-160 and building a hypersonic Pak-DA.
A hypersonic PAK DA would likely cost more than a decent navy... there is a reason the US retired the SR-71 with its exotic design and it is only a Mach 3.5 aircraft... a Mach 5 aircraft is more than just a new engine.