Is it Possible INS Vikrant is the former HMCS Bonaventure

[Ming777]

There is a supposed rumour that the INS Vikrant was actually switched with HMCS Bonaventure while the latter was to be scrapped. And the idea is that with Bonaventure having just gotten upgrades, the Indians made a deal that had the less modern Vikrant (ex-Hercules) switched when Bonnie disappeared for two weeks before being scrapped in Japan.

For the TL,DR: The museum ship in Mumbai is actually the former Bonaventure while the original Vikrant was scrapped as the "Bonnie"

Is there any plausibility of this rumour?

 

[FlyingDutchman]

At first it seems as realistic as the myth that a British carrier was sunk during the Falklands war and quickly replaced with a new one.

Googling around it does seem a bit weird that the Bonaventura was apparently lost for two weeks.


IMHO the conspiracy theorists lose a lot of their credibility due to this guy's website: http://www.aame.in/2012/01/indian-aircraft-carrier-canadian.html

with nuggets as these:

There are photos of Canadian fighter squadron patches decaled to panels in the Vikrant

while the Bonaventura didn't operate fighters anymore after it's refit (solely helicopters and Trackers AFAIK).

 

[Ming777]

Apparently most of the theories were based on an excerpt from the Halifax Herald about Senator Mike Forrestall:

"One evening, Forrestall called the Indian Embassy and asked the military attaché how the Bonaventure was working out. The attaché replied, 'Splendid, we are quite pleased with it,' and then, realizing his slip, immediately hung up the phone."

 

[teg]

Apparently most of the theories were based on an excerpt from the Halifax Herald about Senator Mike Forrestall:

"One evening, Forrestall called the Indian Embassy and asked the military attaché how the Bonaventure was working out. The attaché replied, 'Splendid, we are quite pleased with it,' and then, realizing his slip, immediately hung up the phone."

And this is exactly why there are conspiracy theories about it - the majority of conspiracy theorists do not understand the idea that someone in a position of power can make a mistake. You could even argue that conspiracy theories are a sort of negative authoritarian mindset, with the leader being malevolent rather than benevolent.

teg

 

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

Which one made the slip? My reading comprehension isn's what it used to be.

 

[alfredtuomi]

well it would certainly be a far better use of Canadian taxpayers dollars than going for razorblades.

 

[Vonar Roberts]

Unlikely given the fact that the ship was scrapped in Taiwan in 71, there is documentation that components of the ship were used to rebuild the catapult aboard the Australian aircraft carrier HMAS Melbourne, and the ships anchor is preserved in Canada. The survival legend portion on the Wikipedia page seems to be a recent addition, I don't remember it being there the last time I read the Wikipedia page on Bonaventure a year or so ago.

I find it funny however that American pilots refused to land on the carrier's short deck.

 

[Binky the Clown]

Theories like this pop up all the time in maritime lore, even though they ignore a crucial fact: swapping a pair of ships for one another is nearly impossible to do. Two ships built from the same plans will never be 100% identical. An example of this would be Olympic and Titanic, another pair of ships that have a similar "switch" theory circulating around the internet. Both were created from the same set of drawings, but had numerous differences in their internal and external layouts. Olympic and Titanic did not even share the same propellors as each other (Titanic's were of a slightly different diameter and pitch) as Titanic had a greater GRT than her sister. As a result of this, Olympic and Titanic's propellors had to be custom made for each other - the people at Harland & Wolff couldn't say "go to the back room and grab one of the big ones!" whenever they needed to replace a damaged propellor. Unlike mass-produced goods such as cars or airplanes, the parts of ships are not usually interchangeable. Each piece is made individually, and then fitted together as a unit.