I have never designed a warship before, but wouldn’t you want it to be able to operate nearly any where in the world? (Except for the arctic)
“I have never designed a warship before, but wouldn’t you want it to be able to operate nearly any where in the world? …” [READINABLUESTATE, post 84]
In a word, no.
Building ships to range farther and function across a broader range of temperatures costs money. As costly as these vessels were for the Royal Navy, doing what’s suggested would only make the final bill that much higher.
One of the inescapable truths of weapon system design: British naval architects and RN leaders had to deal with it during the leadup to the First World War. RN warships had to sail all over the place, guarding the British Empire and policing the sea lanes; warships of the Kaiserliche Marine (Imperial Navy of Germany) did not.
A constraint that applies to all weapon systems, down to the rifles and bayonets for footsoldiers.
UK Ministry of Defence officials and political leaders chose not to fund vessels incapable of doing what R-in-BS has deemed important, accepting whatever risks that came with the decision. This one has come back to bite them.