What if the US never built the "New Navy" from the 1880's? After the Civil War the US navy was allowed to decay to a pitiful state. Most of the navy's ships were old, worn down, and obsolete. There was a small attempt to remedy this after Virginius Affair in 1873 prompted the US to order the Amphitrite class monitors but their construction was something of a fiasco only being commissioned 20(!) years after construction began. The US only began to rebuild the Navy from 1882 when congress approved funds for the construction of 4 modern steel warships, known as the ABCD ships after the first letters of their names. Then, in 1890 the Navy began to build a full battle fleet. This marked the re-emergence of the US Navy from being a virtual non-entity in the 1870's.
The reasons for the decline of the navy in the period are, as always, due to many factors but a few of the most important were Congress being more willing to pay for the reconstruction and repair of existing ships than all new construction. Another was the focus on coastal defense.
Now, I don't think a construction program for the navy could be avoided entirely. The US navy was simply in such a poor state that something had to be done but the focus could have been different. Instead of choosing to build a fleet of battleships the US could have remained dedicated to coastal defense. That would likely mean more monitors and torpedo boats and a lot of mines and coastal artillery. Perhaps over time we could see the US build ships similar to the Scandinavian nations' coastal battleships.
And now we come to the elephant in the room. Mahan. Frankly, I don't know how these changes in the US navy would effect Mahan and his ideas. He wrote The Influence of Sea Power Upon History after he'd retired from the navy but he was encouraged in his writing by people he met in the service. However, I think butterflying Mhan's ideas has such significant butterflies we'll ignore it for this thread and assume other nations do what they did IOTL.
The reasons for the decline of the navy in the period are, as always, due to many factors but a few of the most important were Congress being more willing to pay for the reconstruction and repair of existing ships than all new construction. Another was the focus on coastal defense.
Now, I don't think a construction program for the navy could be avoided entirely. The US navy was simply in such a poor state that something had to be done but the focus could have been different. Instead of choosing to build a fleet of battleships the US could have remained dedicated to coastal defense. That would likely mean more monitors and torpedo boats and a lot of mines and coastal artillery. Perhaps over time we could see the US build ships similar to the Scandinavian nations' coastal battleships.
And now we come to the elephant in the room. Mahan. Frankly, I don't know how these changes in the US navy would effect Mahan and his ideas. He wrote The Influence of Sea Power Upon History after he'd retired from the navy but he was encouraged in his writing by people he met in the service. However, I think butterflying Mhan's ideas has such significant butterflies we'll ignore it for this thread and assume other nations do what they did IOTL.