Frigate vs Destroyer

Share your best strategies and tactics with other players by posting them here.

Moderator: MOD_Command

Post Reply
User avatar
kevinkins
Posts: 2465
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:54 am

Frigate vs Destroyer

Post by kevinkins »

“The study of history lies at the foundation of all sound military conclusions and practice.”
Alfred Thayer Mahan
User avatar
Gunner98
Posts: 5996
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 12:49 am
Location: The Great White North!
Contact:

RE: Frigate vs Destroyer

Post by Gunner98 »

An interesting discussion but I don't think it answers the question. Or maybe it does.

By using the Zumwalt as a comparator, I think it skews the discussion. At 16000 tons it has 60% more displacement than a Ticonderoga class CG (or almost any other cruiser in history), and with its limited run (3 ships) it seems more of a technology test-bed/demonstrator than an a class of ship integrated into the fleet. Similar to CGN-9 Long Beach.

Using the Arleigh Burk as a comparator seems more logical, and they are almost as large as the Ticos.

I also think the distinction needs a time-stamp. Today with miniaturization Frigates are much more capable than they were in the 1990's and exponentially more capable than their forefathers in the 1960s.

I believe the nub of it is function. DD= General purpose, all round capability. FF= specific purpose with limited capability in other roles.

Just my $0.02CAD

B

Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/
User avatar
mikkey
Posts: 3173
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 1:04 pm
Location: Slovakia

RE: Frigate vs Destroyer

Post by mikkey »

Interesting article, thanks for sharing.
ARCNA442
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 9:28 pm
Contact:

RE: Frigate vs Destroyer

Post by ARCNA442 »

In my opinion, trying to find useful Frigate / Destroyer descriptions is pointless because every navy builds and uses ships differently. For instance, Japan's "destroyers" are single-purpose ASW ships, while India's "frigates" are fast multi-role ships. And that doesn't even get into the problem of ships that have been reclassified (e.g. Ticonderoga-class DDG) or are called different things in different languages (e.g. Horizon-class "frigates" with "D" hull numbers).

I think the only really viable classification method would be based on combat systems, much like how the old DD/CL/CA/BB designations were based on main gun size. However, given all the possible permutations, I have yet to figure out a way of doing so that is both accurate and succinct. So I tend to default to 75-100 meters overall length = corvette, 100-150m = frigate, 150-200m = destroyer, >200m = cruiser.
FTBSS
Posts: 211
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 12:17 am

RE: Frigate vs Destroyer

Post by FTBSS »

Destroyers in general are general purpose can do multiple functions with a heavy enough loadout to be self sustaining for an extended period of time. generally 6-8k displacement.

Frigates are in general more specialized some loaded out for ASW some for short range aaw some for Asuw/scouting or radar pickets. You can also in some navies have general purpose frigates (OH Perry was an example)but usually not enough weapons for sustained operations. Usual displacement 4-6k
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”