Incorrect armour ratings on Brit BB,s

[red admiral]

Has anyone else noticed the incorrect armour ratings for these British Battleships-
Nelson-Deck armour=108mm [it was actually 6.25 inches maximum on half inch plate giving a total of 6.75 inches or 172mm].
Nelson-Turret armour=336mm [it should be 406mm/16 inches].
Nelson-CT armour=336mm [it should be 356mm/14 inches].

KGV-Turret armour=312mm [it should be 324mm/12.75 inches].
KGV-Belt armour=360mm [it should be 374mm/14.7 inches].
KGV-Deck armour=159mm [I am not sure on this figure. As I remember it, it was actually 5.88 inches max with a 1.5 inch weather deck giving a total of 187mm-I think].

Also some of the durability ratings seem well suspect.
Nelson=133-This seems well low, I think 140 would be a more realistic figure.
Hermes=61- Simply far too high,[41 is more realistic, which is what it was in the original WITP game I think].
Illustrious/Indomitable/Implacable=80/79/85 respectively,[again well low considering these were well armoured and considerably tougher than the Enterprise class rated at 79].
Richelieu=140- Far too low.[The old Repulse is rated at 142-how can this be. Richelieu was a modern very large well armoured battleship so I think around 150 plus is more realistic.

[witpqs]

These observations go in the "AE Naval and OOB Issues" thread in the main AE forum.

[red admiral]

oops sorry. Will do this.

ORIGINAL: witpqs

These observations go in the "AE Naval and OOB Issues" thread in the main AE forum.