in a real war with US , it will have no easy way to fly to the atlantic and to the eastern coast of US and take a major offensive operation. something that NATO can do from plenty of places.. in eastern europe and norway ,sweeden too..
So the only weapons that Russia can use are nuclear submarines that manage to sneak into atlantic ocean undetected, but they are next to useless for a conventional war.. since russia don't have enough attack submarines that can reach the atlantic.. and do it at the right time.. so NATO closes allies and Anglo powers in case of war ,will hit all russian strategic and long range airforce before it can reach the atlantic.. they can fly to atlantic sea through the artic.. but they will face thousands of planes,drones targeting them..
Russia need to invest more in a powerful airforce ,than a powerful navy.. make flying submarines and call them
bombers.. and that are stealth and fly at very high altitudes.. something like a mini space shuttle bomber ,
dozens of them.. that can fire a ton of bombs and hypersonic.. this is what Russia needs ,to become a real
offensive power.. instead of a defensive one... because is a major war with NATO start.. Russia fight will be limited to europe ,middle east and zones close to russia main land..
Russia needs to prepare for dominating space , with high altitude space bombers.. that can easily bypass the entire NATO airforces ..that will force them to develop space plane interceptors and build a lot of them..
in case of a world war 3..Putin weakness will not allow him to take advantage of its powerful weapons ,
and will limit its fight to defense and regional targets only.. near rusia and europe. have the stomach to use its big nuclear weapons against US mainland.. by having a powerful space force bombers.. Russia could have at hand the option to use its tactical weapons , including hypersonic conventional or nuclear.. , on US main land
in case a major war start..
in other words.. the limitations of projection of power that Russia face.. for putin to scale the war ..
from from 1,2-3 as if was in the fight in syria.. to number 10.. by using bulavas and sarmats missiles..
Russia needs tactical and strategic near space airforce power projection , that is fast and highly mobile ,and deploy withing 1-3 hours near US coast.. submarines will take a month ,to reach the US eastern coast from Russia.. and such level of response will be too late... yet they can fire a sarmat withing seconds from russia.
but the problem remains the same..
1)-Russia is very good in small scale regional conflicts like syria
2)-Russia is very weak in intermediate power projection.. lets striking at US main land with conventional or small tactical nukes.. at miltary positions
3)Russia is very strong in full scale total destruction..
So because of this weakness in #2.. the end result is that in order to retaliate ..at US ,they will need to scale very fast.. the war ..from zero to ten in a small time.. this limit significatively Russia capabilities to impose its
will in a war. and defend its interest.. in .small scale conflict or an intermediate one.. as we saw in syria vs turkey.. and vs israel.. Russia is not dominating completely.. and the end result is .. if Russia victory is a very limited one ,and will always fail ,at imposing its will ,in any conflict for ending it.. so even when "win.".
it will lose. and conflicts will not be solved.. ever.. as it is the conflict in syria ,ukraine and many others that will happen.. and NATO will start..
if russia had a real powerful airforce ,it could shut down hundreds of NATO planes from near space orbit altitude, easily destroy nato satelites and reach with total impunity the atlantic ,and reach US aircraft carriers formations..
as it is now.. Russian submarines is the only thing Russia have to bypass NATO superior airforce formations .
that is sneaking secretly into the atlantic.. but this is an obsolete policy ..because once russia fire a missile .the position of their subs will be known and wawrships will be sent to the area..
all that said.. US is way better prepared to fight Russia in a medium scale conventional war.. or a very limited
tactical nuclear one.. and Putin options vs US and major nato allies will be either .
1) accept an humiliating cease of fire.. with US losing warships and planes.. but Russia suffering 10x times more .. suffering the worse part..
2)escalate the conflict to a total nuclear war.. where russia will hit harder.. but will not achieve a victory either..
since nobody will win in a full scale nuclear war.. every one will be destroyed .
So Russia needs to change dramatically their tactics.. all those surface warships ,im not convinced on them..
versus the $$cost /performance they offer.. is too expensive with so little power.. just 10x su-34 ,could achieve the same damage results of one russian frigate.. if not higher.. Russia best frigate only fire 32 missiles..
something that israel airforce can do to syria with 6x cheap f-16s.. and if one of them is shotdown..then it will
be not much lose.. and only 2 pilots killed.. contrary to a warship ,that if sink you lose near a hundred of sailors.
Russia needs to build a space force , with high altitude bombers .if wants to have a real deterrence force ,
that can easily bypass nato airforces..and nato navies.. in europe and in the atlantic.. so to send the few attack submarines ,that russia have to the atlantic in 3-4 weeks of of travel ,is not real deterrence force..
in a wars timing ,speed and positioning is everything. having a powerful near space orbit stealth bomber force
will do far more difference ,than a large surface navy.and more cost effective too..