War reaches Canada!
 

As a Canadian, I didn't know the extent to which the U-Boat war raged in our waters. Over 20 ships were lost not just in the Gulf, but in the actual River of the St. Lawrence! Nine by one Type IXB alone! I was always very proud that Canada was a major (total and especially proportional) contributor to the Allies, that we didn't wait to be directly threatened, that our fighting services were entirely voluntary, and that we did all this despite never being directly attacked ourselves. But I guess I'll have to settle for the first three.

I HIGHLY recommend The Battle of the St. Lawrence (Greenfield) for an in-depth view of the politics, U-boat tactics, and ASW tactics at the time (each given about the same amount of space). There are several interviews quoted, as well as U-Boat captain's diaries, and it gives a very good look at this "forgotten" aspect of the Battle for the Atlantic. For example, both sides talk about how the mixture of fresh and salt water affected the acoustic, diving, and detection characteristics of their boats.

I'm off to read Essex's book on the same topic now.

I certainly agree with you and share in your pride.

Canada was a loyal and ferocious ally to the end.

What I find hard to accept is the fact that the Canadian ships were usually last in line when it came to the fitting of new technology, despite the fact some of her escort groups were actually led by british commanded destroyers already fitted with said improved technology.

It wasn't until the Neptune phase of Overlord that the shackles of restraint were lifted and they were allowed to undertake offensive ASW duties.

Double standards IMHO, treating an ally as a second rate partner....and I am a British/English citizen.

That leads to another really interesting part of the book. The radar/anti-radar tactics. A major problem in the St Lawrence for the Canadians was their lack of centimetric radar. That allowed the Germans to make several attacks unnoticed, including surface attacks with the decks awash. A neat little trick that isn't modeled into the game as far as I know. All the radar activity did scare the Germans into greater caution though, so it did have some value.

Additional books on U-boat warfare in Canadian waters
 

U-boats Against Canada: German Submarines in Canadian Waters (1985) by Michael Hadley

A Bloody War: One Man's Memories of the Canadian Navy, 1939 - 1945 by Hal Lawrence

The Enemy on Our Doorstep: The German Attacks at Bell Island, Newfoundland (1994) by Steve Neary

50 North: Canadians at War #1, U-boats and Allied escorts clash in Canada's Atlantic Background by Alan Easton

North Atlantic Run: The Royal Canadian Navy and the Battle for the Convoys (1985) by Marc Milner

Note: Marc Milner is a Canadian historian, so just about any book by him should be about the Canadian Navy.

On the Triangle Run: The Fighting Spirit of Canada's Navy (1986, 2000) by James B. Lamb

The U-boat Hunters: The Royal Canadian Navy and the Offensive Against Germany's Submarines (1994) by Marc Milner

Hope you find this helpful.

Nice list :yep:


RDP

Thanks for the list, that should keep me busy!

At least the Canada wasn't the only one in that boat! Australia too had similar problems in WW1 with it's troops. It fought for 4 years to combine all it's troops under and Australian commander (Monash, considered to be one of the best generals of WW1). They (along with the Canadian armed forces, as well as some british and french troops) gave the Germans such a thumping at Amiens the first day of battle was "the black day of the German Armythat the German general Erich Ludendorff said that the first day of battle was "the black day of the German Army"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Amiens
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_John_Monash

I don't suppose anyone would ever argue that anything is 'fair and even' in times of armed conflict.

It was interesting however to note that Monash came from Prussian - Jewish origin.

Sad thing about Canada, being one of Britain's staunchest allies, was the disaster at Dieppe. 6,000 mostly Canadian troops were sent virtually unsupported to land in Dieppe,France. Over half were killed or captured. The rationale was that the operation provided valuable amphibious landing experience. I chalk it up to British war atrocities.

Let's try not going in the direction of accusing allies of committing war atrocities against one another.

This is the fastest route to angst between those who have already contributed on this thread in a polite and positive way.

Apologies for any offense, but it did happen and one would be wise to take the lessons of history to heart. In this case the "good guys" are not always what they seem. Investigate the incident involving U-156, colloqiually known as the Laconia incident.

In short it involved a b-24 attacking U-156 with allied survivors on the decks and in towed rafts, flying a red cross flag.

Certainly the Axis commited atrocities in the war, with the Holocaust being the most memorable, but the allies did as well. Perhaps the generations of today would do better to learn of the atrocities even their own nation could commit than to ignore them in the name of "polite" conversation or political correctness.

This is, of course, ignoring the dubious record of our Soviet "allies". Nonetheless I would simply beseech that all remember; Rightousness is evil's best disguise.

Criticism of all types is welcome,
Thanks!

No offence taken Kaleun, nor any criticism levelled.

I can also assure you I am well versed in WWII matters having studied it for over 40 years and being fortunate enough to have an 84 year old living father who fought throughout from the Spanish Civil War to the end in the Pacific.

History can sometimes turn out to be identical to those other two chestnuts, namely, Politics and Religion when it comes to open debate.....a veritable minefield.

LEST WE FORGET