Historic ratings described naval price points

Should modern navies abandon frigate and destroyer labels and return to the rating system?

Ratings usefully described size and cost tiers, but modern politics would misread terms such as third-rate as judgments of quality.

Ratings are interpreted as size and price tiers, rather than judgments about how well a ship was built. A first-rate carried the greatest available power, while a second-rate offered a somewhat reduced three-decker. Third-rates supplied efficient battle-line strength, and two or three could threaten a first-rate. Fifth-rates sustained sea control while unrated vessels helped use it. The same fleet-role pattern is drawn across the Napoleonic era and later wars. A return to the terminology is favoured in principle, with the reservation that modern audiences would misunderstand a third-rate purchase as poor quality.