Something related to this has been discussed in the literature recently. Superalgebras in D=26+1 do exist, as well as D=26+2, D=27+2, and D=27+3. In fact, we found a new class of superalgebras that extend to infinite dimensions and discussed an infinite class of near-horizon geometries [1].
We became interested in D=11+3 because Bars (and Sezgin) in 1997 showed how a supermembrane algebra unifies all of the supergravity and string theory supermembrane algebras in D=9+1 and D=10+1. M-theory has to compactify and resort to dualities, which implies that higher dimensions are required. Note that F-theory is 12-dimensional and has potentially a bit more success with the standard model.
We also published a 11-brane worldvolume realization from D=27+3, implying how D=26+1 can have a 10-brane worldvolume for M-theory [2]. If M-theory was inspired largely by E8 x E8 heterotic string theory, there has to be a reconciliation of the origin of the 16-dimensional lattice. There is bosonic M-theory, but there are also valid superalgebras. The no-go theorem of Nahm to not go beyond D=10+1 assumed compactification directly to D=3+1, but it did not consider nested braneworld models. Since we go first from D=27+3 to D=11+3 and then later to D=3+3 or D=3+1, we do not violate any of the
For instance, a warm dark matter researcher claimed that roughly 2,000 degrees of freedom were suggested. The 2048 spinor came out from the nested braneworld structure, but only when the degrees of freedom are considered with respect to the worldvolume at the appropriate energy level [3].
We proposed a candidate Lagrangian for D=26+1 supergravity, but could not yet prove supersymmetry by solving for the over 6,000 coefficients [4]. The 98,304 in the decomposition of the Griess algebra from John Conway relates to the on-shell degrees of freedom of a Rarita-Schwinger field, or "could-be" gravitino, in D=26+1. However, further research is needed to clarify.
We have had personal discussions about the 9-brane in relation to heterotic string theory, as you mentioned. Well done, perhaps you saw the vision first. There is still a lot to explore here, I suspect that non-Abelian gerbes are necessary to prove the theory has supersymmetry. We discussed this notion of "weak triality" for SO(24) that suggests a hint towards supersymmetry.
[1] M. Rios, A. Marrani and D. Chester,
``Geometry of exceptional super Yang-Mills theories,''
Phys. Rev. D 99, no.4, 046004 (2019),
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.046004,
https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.06101.
[2] M. Rios, A. Marrani and D. Chester,
``Exceptional super Yang-Mills in 27 + 3 and worldvolume M-theory,''
Phys. Lett. B 808, 135674 (2020),
doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2020.135674,
https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.10709.
[3] S. Paduroiu, M. Rios, A. Marrani and D. Chester,
``Warm Dark Matter from Higher-Dimensional Gauge Theories,''
Universe 7, no.12, 462 (2021),
doi:10.3390/universe7120462,
https://arxiv.org/abs/2202.08459
[4] A. Marrani, M. Rios and D. Chester,
``Monstrous M-Theory,''
Symmetry 15, no.2, 490 (2023),
doi:10.3390/sym15020490,
https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.06742