How i see it:
Seems russia has all it’s eggs in one basket: intimidation. Militarily, via advertising the possession of a handful of (supposedly) indefensible- against nuclear technologies. They’ve been boasting of these in development for years prior to the second ukraine operation.
Meanwhile, their conventional air/sea/ land forces are hollowed-out and second rate by tech, third rate by organization, with air power being perhaps the highest cost to maintain useful numbers at cutting edge of the lot. But all of it is expensive to maintain, particularly the human training element. By comparison, saber rattling a “few” 5th gen nuclear technologies - not so expensive.
Now, are said intimidating technologies REAL, real but over-stated (degree?), or it’s utter bullchit - that is the gambit being leveraged, for lack of a dominant conventional force. Russia gambled that, given finite resources, it didn’t “need” to maintain an expensive competent air force if the opponent/allies believe russia holds an ace in the hole come an existential fight. Trouble is, ukraine isn’t an existential conflict for russia, so they’re reduced to struggling and threatening and slogging on with the shabby force they have, and preciously short on air power.
Russian leadership does not place value on human life the same as the west. Never has. Makes conflict an interesting calculus, even with no legitimate air force in play.
