Re: sub-launched nuclear armed cruise missiles
"The entire russian economy is smaller than a 5th rate western country".
Au contraire. According to the CIA World Factbook, the UK was ranked 7th in the world in 2014 with a GDP of $2.44 trillion; Russia was 9th with a GDP of $2.01 trillion. How many 5th rate Western countries do you think there are in the world's top eight by GDP? (And are you including the UK as one?)
Adjusted for purchasing power parity, Russia moves to 7th with a GDP of $2.49 trillion, and the UK is 8th with a GDP of $2.31 trillion. There are some other interesting figures. In terms of budget income, the UK ranks 6th ($986.1 billion) and Russia 12th ($416.8 billion). So the Russian government spends less than half as much as the UK government, although their effective GDPs are about the same. (Possibly the flat income tax rate of 13% has something to do with it). Is that good? Hmmm. The UK surges far ahead when it comes to its budget deficit of 8.2%, almost exactly 82 times Russia's (which is negligible). Russia's exports, at 582 billion, are 12% greater than the UK's. 12.7% of Russians are below the poverty line, compared to 14% in the UK. The unemployment rate is 5.5% compared to the UK's 8%, and public debt is 7.7% of GDP compared to the UK's 88.7%.
Focussing more narrowly on the topic under discussion, the Russian Su-37, today's "gold standard" in jet fighters, costs approximately $40-65 million each compared to well over $100 million for the F-35 (the cheaper alternative to the F-22). Although apparently you will soon be able to get the basic F-35A version for a bargain basement $98 million - if you don't need any optional extras such as engines.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
