Arilou - Thank you for you kind words. They're exactly the kind of constructive and supportive comment I have come to expect and cherish from you.
Carlstadt Boy - I did, perhaps, get a tad carried away with the detail. But at least it was appreciated.
DonnieBaseball - I tried to avoid making every ship too good, if only because I want to do the write up for the next generation, but as you say I think they're a fairly strong looking line up.
The dockyards was a last minute addition, but I figured it made sense; if the government is going to throw money at infrastructure then I'm sure the Navy would use it's influence to point meaningfully at the dockyards.
Derek Pullem - Hopefully they can learn that lesson in a slightly less expensive manner, but we shall have to wait and see.
trekaddict - I can guarantee a great deal of photoshopped carrier action certainly.
DonnieBaseball (Again) - I don't think that will actually be a major handicap, if only because the AA guns was fairly poor historically (certainly on the Tribals, to a lesser extent on the Towns) so the actual effective difference will probably minor.
I agree though that's bugger all good when a dive bomber is screaming down on you. However there's always the hope the RN can learn this in time for the next round of ship building.
Jape - It's a risk I run, too many interesting facts to get down that I've spent time acquiring and can't bear to leave out. It seems to be popular though.
Vann the Red - I do think it's important not to damn people with hindsight; in general the people who made such technological mistakes (on all sides) weren't idiots or wilfully blind but trying to do their best with imperfect information while playing for very high stakes. No-one gets it right all the time and I try and reflect that, if nothing else it would be quite a dull AAR.
Lord Strange - Someone will lose battleships to air power certainly, though which navy it is depends on who gets to fight Japan first....
merrick - My photo editing was not in vain, excellent.
The RN armoured carriers came about for a variety of reasons, none of which apply to this timeline. This time around the reasons all point towards big air groups (bigger FAA, no Regia Marina and no expectation of future fighting in the enclosed Med, actual air op experience, etc). If anything it could be the USN that goes for armoured boxes (if it gets any CVs at all in the near future) as the Admirals there get over-protective of any new tonnage they're allocated. Probably not but it would be an amusing twist.
However as you say the RN CAP will have to be very impressive to avoid the charge of 'I told you so', that means the FAA can't rely of Fairey Fulmars and will have to pull something special out of the bag.
From my understanding the Mogamis were always designed to be 8" cruisers; the conversion was suspiciously easy and their triple 6" turret was conveniently very similar sized to the standard double 8". Which was handy for them.
Quite separately they had serious stability problems and, worse, the IJN made the typical Axis ship building mistake of welding too much; welding saves tonnage but a welded joint doesn't behave like a riveted joint, hence you could only use it for certain areas of the ship. Problem was the IJN designers used it everywhere, hence the serious hull cracking problems. In the end the only solution was hull bulging, solved much of the stability problems and covered over the dodgy welding, however it knocked a good few knots of the top speed. As you say a bit of conventional thinking is sometimes required, particularly with new ideas you don't fully understand.
Jerzul - I have had to learn that not everyone is going to find every update completely to their tastes, especially when I go off on a boat-porn fest.
However if someone not into navy stats could find that update enjoyable then I think I must be doing something right. And thanks for the extravagant praise.
