The 50 Destroyer deal, where the US gave the Brits 50 old flush deck destroyers under Lend-Lease, is pretty famous, but there was also a 10 cutter deal where we gave them 10 relatively new 250 foot cutters. The 255s were built to replace these.
I was surprised to learn that they had managed to sink three submarines.
Click on the link:
for details of these ships’ service in the Royal Navy.
The 255’s were NOT built to replace the 250’s.
As a side note, the 327’s were almost given to the RN as well. ADM Waesche originally wanted give the RN older cutters than the Lake-class, so the U.S. Navy said fine, we’ll take the 327’s instead.
See Scheina’s Cutters and Craft of WWII for details – I know that’s no the correct title, but.
The 255's were NOT built to replace the 250's.As a side note, the 327's were almost given to the RN as well. ADM Waesche originally wanted give the RN older cutters than the Lake-class, so the U.S. Navy said fine, we'll take the 327's instead.See Scheina's Cutters and Craft of WWII for details – I know that's no the correct title, but.
Actually I got the idea that they replaced the 250s from Robert Scheina's book, “Coast Guard Cutters and Craft of World War II.” “The number of units–13 of them–had an interesting origin. Three were to have been replacements for overaged cutters–the Ossipee, Tallapoosa, and Unalga; ten units were to be replacements for he 250-foot class transferred to Great Britain under lend-lease. For economy, all 13 were built to the same design.” Scheina p. 2
Pingback: You Can’t Get There From Here | Chuck Hill's CG Blog
Pingback: Leslie B. Tollaksen, USCGC Chelan, USS Moberley, and the Last Battle in the Atlantic, May 5/6, 1945 | Chuck Hill's CG Blog