A 10:10:7:4:4 treaty ratio for capital ships

What capital-ship ratio could make a higher-limit Washington treaty more equitable?

A 10:10:7:4:4 ratio paired with controlled replacement would keep treaty limits from hollowing out naval industry or forcing unusable designs.

The suggested ratio gives Britain and the United States twenty ships each, Japan fourteen, and France and Italy eight apiece at roughly 41,000 tons standard displacement. It preserves the six-ship margin over Japan that shaped the original treaty ratio. Arms limitation could slow construction without closing shipyards altogether. Predictable replacement schedules and enough design margin would keep shipbuilding infrastructure alive, permit gradual technical improvement, and give sailors viable ships. The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaties (START) provide the comparison: they placed ceilings on weapons while allowing controlled development and replacement. A treaty that leaves nations feeling robbed or forces unusable designs is less likely to remain politically stable.