Britain's armed forces performed an "extremely impressive" operation in Iraq despite a series of equipment shortages, parliament's spending watchdog has said.

Whilst it found the operation to be a success, the National Audit Office painted a chaotic picture in the early stages of the conflict.

The NAO observed that the Ministry of Defence's supply system "was simply swamped by the sheer volume of equipment" being sent to the Gulf.

As a result some troops were left demoralised without body armour, nuclear, biological and chemical suits and desert uniforms.

The watchdog warns that the failure of the logistics system "led to a considerable degree of misappropriation of equipment and stores moving through the supply chain".

It also found there were problems in locating and supplying basic military tools such as clothing and vehicle parts.

This led to shortages and a loss of confidence in the supply chain among forces, the NAO found, with resources being wasted on the purchase of duplicates.

"There were not enough nuclear, biological and chemical warfare protection equipment, spare parts for tanks and armoured vehicles, medical supplies, helicopter spares or desert combat clothing and boots," the report found.

"Urgent action was largely successful in rectifying shortfalls but, for a few equipments, training time and the supply of ancillary equipment was curtailed.

"While the logistics effort was successful overall, the means of tracking supplies in theatre was largely ineffective, manpower intensive and was swamped by the sheer volume of supplies.

"The whereabouts of some key equipment and supplies was unknown and therefore arrangements could not be made to get them to the people who needed them."

Defence secretary Geoff Hoon welcomed the NAO's report. "I am delighted to see further recognition for the outstanding ability and dedication of our servicemen and women," he said.

"I am pleased that the NAO have recognised the impressive standard of the equipment we procure, the effectiveness of equipment support, successes in logistics and the speed and flexibility of our operational planning."

But Edward Leigh, the chairman of the public accounts committee, said troops were "shamefully let down".

"We expect the men and women of the armed forces to fight and maybe die for us," he said.

"So it is an outrage that they could not expect all of the proper equipment, protection and even clothing to do the job we ask of them."

But the report also praised the armed forces for the overall success of the operation.

Mobilisation in the Gulf region was achieved in half the time of the previous campaign in 1991 and British soldiers proved adept at securing infrastructure when the campaign began.

"It was a major achievement to deploy the large United Kingdom force within 10 weeks, half the time it took for the first Gulf war," the report concluded.

Praise was also given to the armed forces for "making the immediate transition from war fighting to peacekeeping" following victory.

And new and modified equipment was also judged to have performed well in its first major test.

NAO chief Sir John Bourn said the armed forces and the Ministry of Defence deserved praise for the success in organising the campaign.

"It is not just the bravery of the men and women who took part in the military operations which should be applauded but also their abilities, their professionalism and their achievements," he said.

"The scale of the operation and the speed with which it was carried out are both extremely impressive.

"There were problems, but these should be seen in the wider context of the overall success.

"The lessons in this report which the MOD can learn from will mean that its performance will be further improved in the future."

Hoon has also unveiled his department's report on the lessons to be learned from the Iraq operation.

The "Lessons for the Future" report follows a "First Reflections" assessment released in July.

The defence secretary said the new report had not ducked hard questions.

"There is no benefit in a lessons process which is bland or uncritical," Hoon said.

"I have encouraged an honest, unflinching report. This is not to underplay our successes.

"It is a fact that our people performed magnificently and a fact that our equipment was highly effective.

"But if we want to maintain the outstanding capabilities of our armed forces, we must learn from the difficulties as well as the successes."