Comments by "Steve Valley" (@stevevalley7835) on "Battle of the Philippine Sea - What if Admiral Lee sailed west?" video.

@JSremus given the constraints of the treaties, First London added fleet limits for cruisers, destroyers and subs, to the WNT's limits for carriers and battleships, there was not much that could be done earlier than the end of 36. KGV and Prince of Wales were laid down new year day of 37, with all the rest of the KGV class laid down by July. All four Illustrious class carriers were laid down in 37. The one possibility is the UK could have used the provision of the WNT that excluded carriers in existence prior to the treaty from the 20 year replacement cycle, and built modern carriers to replace Eagle, Hermes and Furious. Reclassifying those three old ships as something other than carriers would free up enough tonnage for two more Ark Royals.
3
@JohnRodriguesPhotographer the Washington treaty forbade that. The treaty defined all carriers in commission or building at the time of the treaty as "experimental" and not subject to the replacement schedule of the treaty. The UK could replace Argus, Eagle, Hermes, or Furious whenever it wanted. The US could replace Langley whenever it wanted. The UK reclassified Argus, to free the tonnage to build Ark Royal. The US reclassified Langley to free the tonnage to build Wasp. Ranger, being built after the treaty conference, would have to wait until it aged out, twenty years after it was built.
1