L II There was a torpedo room. It is the space below the guns of A turret, immediately below the armoured deck.
Colombamike's scan is a little blurred. The wording is "submerged torpedo rooms" one word per line.
L II guns The forward twin 6" is shown on Campbell's plan to be on the same deck level as the 4.7" HA. See below for more discussion.
L3 has 16x6in There are three twin turrets each side, and two more by the mainmast (your 'searchlights') It is clear from the plan and elevation considered together that these are a deck higher than the turrets along the sides. All are labelled "twin 6" B.L. guns" on both plan and elevation. On the elevation the label by the mast has "P&S" (port and starboard) added. That those are a deck higher is confirmed by the positions and labelling of the 4.7in HA guns.
For L2, L3, K2, K3 the text of Campbell's Warship article clearly states "The 6in guns were in twin turrets with 150 rounds per gun"
[At that design stage the twin turrets were still at 40 degrees elevation, not the 60 in Nelson]
The actual drawings on which his article was based would be at least 4' 6" long, and probably 9ft, supplemented by the text in the Ships Covers and ADM reports. That probably the finest warship design team in history might not be able to illustrate the difference between casemates and turrets is to say the least unlikely. The Director of Naval Construction (then Sir Eustace Tennyson d'Eyncourt) puts his name to such drawings. They had put casemates and turrets on the Duke of Edinburgh and Warrior plans some 20 years earlier. It is more likely simply that the design of the turrets had not been finalized.
F2 and F3 battlecruisers: These were the first designs under the 35000ton Washington limit. They were drawn up late in 1921 (not 1928) with 3x2 and 3x3 15in respectively, but abandoned in favour of the slower 3x3 16in Nelson design when it became clear that USA and Japan would complete battleships with 16in guns.
There are 1/16in = 1ft plans (about 4ft long) in ADM 1/9232 and a reasonable representation on p76 of John Jordan's book "Warships after Washington", though F3's funnel ought to be about 50% wider than F2's. See my very sketchy rendering posted by Elouda on
http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index. ... ruiser-f3/
There are several two-funnel drawings on the net but none are correct. All derive from Red Admiral's tidying up of Crystaleye's very rough sketch at
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/i ... pic=1747.0
I have an official TNA scan of the drawings in ADM 1/9232 but the National Archive's copyright rules prohibit posting on websites unless a fairly substantial fee is paid. Sorry.
In 1928 there were two designs of 35000ton battleships. One had 3x3 16in in the Nelson layout. The other had 4x2 16in in R class layout. They were prepared in anticipation of the end of the 10 year Washington 'battleship building holiday' in 1931. Then came the financial crash in 1929, and the first London Naval Agreement in 1930. In 1930 a series of RN battleship designs was drawn up, with the second of the 1928 designs the largest, going down through 8x14in on 29000 tons, 8x12in on 26000 and 8x11in on 23,300 to 8x10in on 22000tons.
There were also a 27000ton battlecruiser design, and small battleship and battlecruiser sketch designs in preparation for the abortive Geneva disarmament talks starting in 1932.