I recently completed posting an Alternate Battle of Jutland thread from WW1. The AU basically removed the pre-dreadnaughts from the HSF order of Battle leaving Scheer operating under severe operational restrictions from the Kaiser to preserve the HSF at all costs. In that thread the battle involved around just the screening forces (battlecruisers) but given the tactical situation it could equally have led to no confrontation at all. It raised to me an interesting AH possibility for speculation, as to what would the postwar environment make of the situation where neither fleet was actually employed in a major action? IRL even with pre-dreadnaughts, the entire North Sea campaign produced only a single major battle IOTL (Jutland), and many pundits of the time later queried the effectiveness of the employment of the Grand Fleet. I think it raises an interesting specter of what would the result be in the fervid 'no more war' atmosphere after the armistice with no such battle? In societies traumatized by the cost both social and economic, how would the vast amounts of national treasure invested in navies be defended postwar? How would the traditionalist bodies like the RN justify their future, and what would the impact be on iconic naval logic such as Mahan's 'Fleet-in-being' concept and its intrinsic costs to the national purse survive? Undoubtedly the WNT would in some form go ahead, but the question leads to some wildly interesting alternatives for naval evolution in the 1920s and 30s. I'd be interested to see what ideas people come up with. T.