The British had built over 142 light tanks with one man turrets from 1931-1935 for both British and colonial use, exports are later.
The British had time to figure out the problems with one man turrets and indeed had switch to 2 man turrets in the light tanks in 1936 with the MK V with 22 produced, quickly followed by the MK VI light in 1936 with a larger turret.
Going back to the one man turret in the A 11 was certainly a retrograde step even if it bought thicker armor.
It's pretty much the result of picking the Mark IV Dragon and Ford V8 as the main automotive elements instead of A10 or other commercial elements. The book doesn't imply that any lower operational weight limit existed than 18 tons. So it was probably allowed to go heavier than the 11 tons of the A11.
It may have been cheap but it's actual combat value was small for the what it did cost.
How many more A 10s or A 10 "supers" could have been built? Fewer tanks but more capable?
Back when the Valentine/A10 "super" were mooted in early 1938, the debate was whether to go through with them or ordering another batch of 60 A11s, later increased to 79 to provide training vehicles to TA formations. Had they chosen Val/A10 "super", their production would most likely have started straight after the first batch of A11s in mid/late 1939.
Naturally if the idea had come up even earlier than early 1938, even more could be built by May 1940, but I think that once Limited Liability is cancelled the orders will pile up fast enough to avoid any gaps beyond the small order that may have happened in 1938. Logically Val/A10 "super" development would take place entirely in peacetime instead of partly wartime OTL, and early production may also start in peacetime, so you wouldn't get a literal "one year offset". Nonetheless it means that alt-May 1940 would look much closer to IRL late 1940 or early 1941 for Val production, and it will further add up later on.
I am curious about development as well. Earlier end of development for Mark I Val may mean that Vickers could proceed with the 3-man 2-pounder turret and other improvements possibly just shy of the Declaration of War, meaning that they may show up well earlier. This would make the 3-man 2 pdr turret a much more important milestone as 6 pdr production itself would still not be affected (unless we combine "early Val" timeline with 6 pdr with more ressources).
I don't know if Vals would really affect operations in France since historically, the Arras offensive didn't meet the bulk of German armor so the 2pdr wouldn't be all that important. Maybe the higher speed of Val compared to A11 and the 2-man turret could have some modest effect? Maybe given that Val is much more useful than A11, Vickers would have had the ressources and orders to ramp up production faster than A11 alone and this would increase the number of tanks in the BEF and not just their average quality?
But overall unless the British "I" tanks end up meeting large amounts of German armor, they probably wouldn't affect events on the ground enough. After France though, the benefits of early Val would allow either faster recovery and training of British Army Tank brigades and maybe allow increased "I" tank reinforcements to North Africa and Greece early in the war.
The weight constraint for the A 13 III (Covenanter) and A 15Crusader really doomed the designs. The smaller hull and turret saved weight but not enough forcing problems with the drive trains and yet not providing enough protection. Also didn't provide enough room for growth. Also sacrificed vison for the commanders.
Agreed. It is very apparent that even with the 340 hp of the Liberty the Cruisers could have done much better. They could have easily achieved at least the minimum armor level approved for Infantry tanks (60mm) in a frontal arc even if not in the >180° arc of the actual I tanks. And good 2 pounder ergos and vision with provisions for 6 pdr.
They had viable paths to follow, they turned away from them in the interest of Cheapness.
The confusion is also shown by the A 14 and A 16 which were supposed to operate independently of the Infantry but were well over the weight limit of the existing bridges? Why spend money on prototypes then? and why restrict later designs to lower weight because of Bridges? unless the bridge restriction was cover for another reason?
I believe that by April 1937 when the A14 and A15 were mooted, Class 25 bridges were alraedy in development for A12.
Maybe with the lighter Cruisers they believed that they wouldn't obtain enough Class 25 bridges and/or wanted the ability to use Class 18 and low capacity civilian bridges?