Carl,
Thank you. I believe the reason why Pearson did not do the same in regards to bridging the forward bulkhead, comes down to economics mainly. I'm sure they (Pearson Yachts) like all others build a specific model with a price point and corresponding profit margin. Easy to do, add the bridge or do it from the onset, but it takes that much more time and material for what many may consider "little gain". Just like other areas of our fine Alberg designed Commanders and Ariels, when Carl was commisioned to design a specific model, he most likely was given parameters, final production cost, being one of them. I think the fitment would have been problematic if they had added the full forward bulkhead and then attempted to lower the deck / cabin roof assembly. Look at other areas of our vessels and you'll see, and like others will attest to, where fitment of ajoining components has a lot to be desired and could have been much better.
But then there are us on this site and all those who seek to "Better" or "Improve" or are striving for the ultimate in "Attention to the Details" and annointed perfectionest that are equally talented to do what Pearson and their factory boat yard assembly builders did not do. It really comes down to "time" and "money" and they are both inter-related.
I'm sure Mr. Alberg and all the folks who contributed to our aging vessels birth would be amazed, and surprised that "our" Commanders and Ariels have such a dedicated following, with owners / Captains that desire the very best for their corresponding "sailing yacht".
To all those on this site, I salute you for your inspiration, talent and most of all sharing your expertise and thoughts.