Conning-tower armour versus command visibility

Why did the US Navy retain heavily armoured conning towers after the Royal Navy moved away from them?

The Bureau of Ships still expected commanders to fight from them, while British captains prioritised visibility in mobile engagements.

American retention of heavily armoured conning towers reflected institutional faith within the Bureau of Ships. Royal Navy officers were more likely to reject the enclosed position because it restricted the view needed to read weather, enemy movement and a changing tactical situation. A conning tower makes more sense in a fixed battle-line exchange where the enemy's bearing is predictable. It becomes less attractive in a mobile action such as the River Plate, where command depends on seeing and reacting to movement.