The lack of strong stern coverage from the 6-inch secondary battery is interpreted here as evidence that the design was shortened and never fully rebalanced. Earlier Royal Navy battleships distributed their secondary guns for broader all-round fire, whereas the Queen Elizabeth layout concentrated most of its battery forward. Machinery spaces, four shafts, armour, and secondary armament all competed inside the available volume. The official endurance figure was 5,000 nautical miles at 12 knots, so fuel and machinery space also constrained the arrangement. An armour scheme studied during the Queen Elizabeth process appeared more fully in the Revenge class, supporting the argument that the earlier hull could not accommodate every desired improvement. The resulting ship was a compressed compromise with an efficient underlying hull form.
Chapter · 36:25-42:09
A truncated hull, forward secondaries, and compromised armor
The forward-heavy 6-inch battery and an armor study deferred to the Revenge class suggest that too many requirements were compressed into a hull that needed more length.