Which naval decision would each speaker change?

If you could change one naval policy or procurement decision, what would you choose and what result would you expect?

The choices focus on aviation control, weapons testing, and capital-ship programs whose consequences would persist across later designs and wars.

The answers range from stopping France's Jeune Ecole detour to preserving an independent Fleet Air Arm and fully testing the US Mark 6 torpedo exploder. Another proposal replaces the Nelson-class path with an F3-derived fast battleship using improved 15-inch guns. That choice could preserve shell commonality, create a continuing 15-inch/50 production line, and give the Royal Navy more fast capital ships before the Second World War. The discussion also warns against forcing one aircraft to perform every naval-aviation role and against false economies in cruiser construction. Together, the examples show that testing policy, institutional control, and production continuity can matter as much as an individual ship design.