Talk:Rothesay-class frigate

NZ ships

'[T]he mortars were more effective for cold war warning...' Not clear.

A depth charge can be fired to deliberately miss the target, and it will explode when it reaches its set depth, thus easy to use for a "warning shot". A torpedo cannot be reliably launched to deliberately miss, and even if it could there is no way to trigger the warhead. A torpedo that misses its target will continue to run until its motor stops, then it sinks without exploding. Thus a torpedo cannot be used for a "warning shot". Torpedoes are also orders of magnitude more expensive than low tech depth charges. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:29, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Admiralty Type numbering confusion

The lead of this article says: "The Rothesay class, or Type 12M frigates were a class of frigates". But we also have Leander-class frigate which says: "The Leander-class, or Type 12M frigates". Perversely, in the "See also" section of the Rothesay-class article, it says "Leander-class frigate – the Type 12M frigate, a general-purpose design following on from the success of the Type 12I". However, in the "See also" section of the Leander-class article, it says "Rothesay-class frigate, the preceding Type 12M frigate." Presumably the "M" suffix stands for "Modified" and the "I" stands for "Improved". We have yet another article, Type 12 frigate, which backs the "Rothesay-class Type 12M" and "Leander-class Type 12I" theory.

The only text I have to hand is Marriott, Leo (1990), Royal Navy Frigates Since 1945, Second Edition; which gives Type 12 for both the Whitby-class frigate and the Rothsay-class, and Type 12M for the Leanders. Thoughts anybody? Alansplodge (talk) 15:21, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

According to Conway's the Rothesays were repeats of the Type 12 Whitbys and the Leanders are incorrectly referred to as Type 12s because other than hull form, the Leanders share next to nothing with the previous vessels. (pp. 519-520) Friedman in British Destroyers and Frigates calls the Rothesays a modified Type 12 design.(p. 368 in the electronic version) On page 439, it says the Leanders were not given a type designation because the class had already been given a name Leander. The final Rothesay hull was reordered as the first vessel of the Leander class. (p. 441) Still looking for info. Llammakey (talk) 17:20, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Jane's Fighting Ships 1980-1981 says the Leanders were an improved version of the Type 12 but does not give a Type designation, unlike the Rothesays (Modified Type 12). Brown in Rebuilding the Royal Navy calls the Leanders Type 12s (p. 16 in the electronic version) and "Improved Type 12"s as the section heading on p. 200. Llammakey (talk) 17:26, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks, the Friedman citation is viewable here. It's all as clear as mud. Alansplodge (talk) 21:30, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

numbers built

you say 21 were built, but only list 14. I suspect the former number is suspect Vicarage (talk) 05:52, 22 October 2024 (UTC)