Comments by "" (@RedXlV) on "HMAS Australia (1911) - Guide 357" video.

Unfortunately, Australia was still part of the British Empire rather than a fully independent nation when the Washington Naval Treaty was signed, so the Royal Australian Navy counted toward British tonnage limits. As such, even if the resources were available, there was no way an obsolete 1st-generation battlecruiser would've been retained. Even Lion and Princess Royal were scrapped under the treaty, after all. The only way HMAS Australia could possibly have lasted even to 1930 would've been if she'd been built as a sister ship of Queen Mary or Tiger instead of as a modified Indefatigable. A 2nd-generation battlecruiser armed with the "heavy" version of the 13.5" gun (firing 1,400 lb rather than 1,250 lb shells) could be reasonably argued to be just as valuable unit as any of the (1911) King George V-class battleships.
10
@stanleyrogouski HMS Malaya actually did fly the Federated Malay States naval ensign, hence her being nicknamed "enraged P&O" (because the four triangle red-white-black-yellow ensign looked very similar to the blue-white-red-yellow P&O House Flag).
5
@patlittle4642 Chile had dibs, they sold her to the UK when WW1 broke out (since she was still under construction at Elswick) and bought her back afterward.
3
She was sold back to Chile and resumed her original name Almirante Latorre for the next 38 years.
2