Letter: Naval concerns

Although the Ministry of Defence is shrugging off the grounding of the submarine HMS Astute off the Isle of Skye (your reports), claiming it wasn't a nuclear incident, the merciless Scottish seas and "shingle" seabed could easily have turned it into one, particularly had the tide stranded the boat for several days.

Meanwhile, published photographs of the incident have revealed features of the hull and propulsor (propeller) that have taken years to develop, and that will now make our newest and most stealthy submarine easier to detect by hostile powers.

This type of grounding/ collision incident is becoming all too common across our small (11-strong) nuclear-powered submarine fleet. It was only last year that HMS Vanguard collided with a French counterpart in an almost improbable coincidence and two years ago that HMS Superb was "written off" (beyond economic repair) in a collision with an underwater rock pinnacle, and only eight years ago that HMS Trafalgar suffered 5 million of damage when it ran aground off Skye.

That the navy's newest (1 billion plus) sub has now been imperilled through grounding at a similar location is one coincidence too many.

Environmental issues aside, each incident carries with it a hefty salvage and repair bill, and operational downtime stretching into months. Surely the navy can't go on attributing these statistically significant incidents to one-off human error? It seems to go beyond that, and sooner or later it will end in tears with the loss of a nuclear submarine. Nuclear-powered submarines are the correct option for our nation in these uncertain times. However, the consequences of losing a nuclear- powered sub are pretty unpalatable in terms of both environmental damage and loss of life.

As such, the Royal Navy owes it to our nation to operate its nuclear submarines safely. And if that means keeping them further offshore, and revising its training and operating practices, so be it.

MARK CAMPBELL-RODDIS

Pont Crescent

Dunblane, Perthshire