So true....it is also factual that the Canadians were often treated as the poor relation by the UK and US in terms of the release of vessels and modified/newly available equipment.

True, and somewhat still true, the last subs we have bought are old UK diesel subs, the HMCS Chicoutimi, within a few weeks of its delivery had encountered some issues. After the repairs, the Chicoutimi was decommissionned. But one thing still is true, we still have one of the best anti-submarine warfare navies there is. We often train in such scenarios with the US and we VERY OFTEN beat their subs or beat them to it (when they use one of theirs as the "target" who is a threat to North America).

I remember there was one diesel sub you purchased off us that experienced a fire whilst transitting on the surface....tragically one of the Canadian crew lost their life as a consequence :nope:

yeap, that was the Chicoutimi. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMCS_Ch..._%28SSK_879%29

That was definitely most unfourtanate :nope:

Well, I guess you learn something new every day. Didn't know about the USN's involvement in the early war, thanks for the info.

I remember watching an interview with a Canadian naval officer shortly after we'd purchased those three Upholder-Class subs. He explained that the U.S.N. always requested the Canadian subs for training exercises with their ASW forces because the diesel boats much stealthier then the American nuclear subs.

When the reporter asked him if a Canadian sub had ever sunk an American carrier in exercises, he gave a huge beaming grin, and after a bit of a pause said that he was not at liberty to answer that question.



Also, the U.S.N. made a habit of broadcasting un-enciphered contact reports of any U-Boats they sighted - well before they had become involved in WWII. Technically, this was not a breach of their neutrality, but it sure was useful information for the allies.