19th Century UK US Naval rivalry

If a war between the lawful US government and the UK looked like a possibility could US industry (despite civil war) have built Iron clads as fast as Britain. (Noting that at that time most Naval capital ships had just become obsolete almost at a stroke
 
The US didn't exceed the UK in manufactoring output until the 1890's, when ironclads where being replaced by battleships and crusiers.

So the quick answer would be no, however the US does have the greater potential so it would depend on how seriously the war was being prosectuted by each of the countries.

If UK was agressor then they would start with the advantage, and I presume try to wipe out the naval dockyards on the Adlantic, forcing all new ships to be built in the Pacific and then sailed round to Adlantic, this would slow things up for the US.

If US was the agressor they would need to do a "pearl harbour" attack on the British Fleets, with much the same effect, it would delay the final outcome of the naval war, but the Brits would bring ships from other fleets and in a straight fight would wipe the US navy out (remember UK had a fleet the size of any TWO other powers).
 
The missing word is "quality"

The US could do a crash building programme of smallish monitor-like ironclads

But Britain can build powerful ocean-going battleships

Sorry, not time to comment more
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
If a war between the lawful US government and the UK looked like a possibility could US industry (despite civil war) have built Iron clads as fast as Britain. (Noting that at that time most Naval capital ships had just become obsolete almost at a stroke

Well, perhaps I'm assuming too much or not assuming enough. When you say 'despite civil war' do you mean essentially during the ACW? I think time obviously is on the Americans side, so the latter into the century the better chances for a US outcome. Course , it would proably be a really expensive campaign on both sides either way.
 
Top