Are our warships an ocean-going disgrace?

THE revelation that our £6 billion fleet of Type 45 destroyers can’t operate in warm water is the worst news for me and all those who have manned ships in the Royal Navy. As a marine engineer, I can’t comprehend why these new ships are spending most of their time in dock. Were they designed not to be able to operate past Land’s End to save money? R. LONG, Hazlemere, Bucks. SURELY it’s obvious that during its expected life of 30 years, a warship will have to operate in warm seas? As a taxpayer I am angry, but I doubt if anyone will get the chop. There was a great fanfare for the aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth, but without escort ships she is going nowhere. Nelson must be spinning in his grave. TED SHEPHERD, Windsor, Berks. THE problems with our warships lie not with the manufacturers or the Royal Navy. The Ministry of Defence laid down specifications which the suppliers were obliged to meet to the letter. Had the manufacturers supplied over-spec equipment, there would have been an outcry about unnecessary expense. Instead, cheeseparing of budgets means ships in harbour awaiting a return to the Clyde for upgrades. DON CAMPBELL, Greenock, Renfrewshire. AT least we get to hear about problems with our military kit – in Russia, it would be covered up.

R. THOMSON, Glasgow. THIS has public procurement written all over it. A billion pounds each for destroyers that don’t work? And £7 billion on Nimrod patrol and attack aircraft that did not work? People need to be sacked and ministers’ heads roll. SIMON CAMPBELL, Glasgow. ENGINE designer ROLLS-ROYCE claims the MoD did not tell them the ships would be in warm waters. Did the builders and designers have to be told these ships had to float? P. BENNISON, Whitley Bay, Northumberland.