Skocz do zawartości


Tragedia na Przełęczy Diatłowa (1/2 luty 1959 r.)

  • Zaloguj się, aby dodać odpowiedź
1141 odpowiedzi w tym temacie

#1121 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 19 wrzesień 2019 - 20:03




Interview with the son of Churkina
Alina, the administrator of the forum, asked me to contact Igor Olegovich Makushkin, even strongly advised, informing that Igor Olegovich, the son of that same expert in the Dyatlov case, Churkina, Genrieta Eliseevna, had just registered at the forum and might want to talk about topics of long interest to us about the participation of his mother in the investigation of the mysterious death of Dyatlov group.
Igor Olegovich responded to my letter, though not immediately, answered only a few questions, also not right away.
It’s necessary to understand that he’s a busy person, he is teaching, moreover, Igor Olegovich simply didn’t know the answer, explaining that Genrieta Eliseevna signed a non-disclosure of the secrets of the investigation in Dyatlov case, which she had access to as a forensic expert, and under no circumstances violated it.
I would like to acquaint with his answers all those interested in revealing that distant tragedy.
Legend in the intewrview:
IOM - Igor Olegovich Makushkin, the son of the same expert on Dyatlov case - Genrietta Eliseevna Churkina
MP - Maya Piskareva
MP: Dear Igor Olegovich!
I am very glad that you agreed to talk about your mother and answer some burning questions.
IOM: Of course, I in no way object to our communication, especially since it concerns my mother.
1962 Genrietta Eliseevna Churkina (Makushkina) at her desk
My mother, Makushkina (Churkina) Genrietta Eliseevna (12 Nov 1930 - 02 Feb 1999), was born in Sysert, Sverdlovsk Region, in the family of a lawyer (judge) and teacher.
In 1954, having graduated from the Sverdlovsk Law Institute, she was hired as an expert in Sverdlovsk forensic research laboratory.
During the period of her work there she conducted many examinations, including on the most “high-profile” cases of those years (the death of Dyatlov group, the case of Korovin brothers gang, etc.).
She was an expert in the field of trace examination, forensic handwriting analysis, technical and forensic examination of documents.
Since 1967 G.E. Makushkina is a lecturer in the Department of Forensics, Sverdlovsk Law Institute, since 1973 - candidate of legal sciences, associate professor of the same department.
She had more than hundred scientific and educational publications, was the author of three "Forensics" textbooks.
Until the last days, she was devoted to the one thing she loved in life - forensics.
Her heart didn't stand the third heart attack.
I also followed my mother's footsteps.
For many years he worked as a forensic expert in the same laboratory, and then became a Professor of Forensic Science.
Now I’m 50, I am the head of a non-governmental expert organization, I also teach at the department at the Law Academy in Yekaterinburg.
MP: Did Genrietta Eliseevna shared with you her thoughts and assumptions about the case?
IOM: Of course, I heard about Dyatlov case since I was young.
Mom told me how they flew to the north of the Sverdlovsk region to inspect the scene of the incident, how she was present at the autopsy of the dead along with the forensic doctor Boris Vozrozhdenny, whom I myself later got to know when I started working as an expert.
In my mother’s home archive there is a second copy of the tent examination (the first copy is in the case file, and a fragment of it is published on the Internet).
After reading the numerous published materials, I realized that I did not have any additional information.
Everything, it seems, has already been said...
About the cuts from the inside of the tent, and about the unusual coloring of objects at the scene and the clothes of the victims, and about the inexplicable lack of tongue in one of the members of the group ...
I also know that my mother signed a non-disclosure of the information that became known to her in connection with the investigation in this case.
I don't think she shared everything she knew.
I think she took something with her.
MP: Igor Olegovich, I would like to clarify some details about the strange ancense of the tongue of L.Dubinina.
After the appearance of the book by A.Gushtin, "The price of state secrets is nine lives," information spread that it was the expert G.E. Churkina who suggested that the tongue split off when transporting the frozen body.
In a conversation with S. Kuleshova at the Radio Svoboda studio in Yekaterinburg, A.Gushtin so bluntly says that "especially the trauma with the loss of the tongue of Dubinina shocked everyone and was not explained for a very long time.
However, expert Churkina - Makushkina, who was talking a lot about this event, literally said the following, that they immediately told the forensic expert Vozdvizhenskiy (mistake - ed.) that, most likely, the corpses of the students, when they were scattered, were already dead and frozen, and when the corpses were dumped into one pile, apparently Dubinina hit the ground so hard that her tongue split off as a piece of ice.
That's the only explanation, it seems to me, that somehow puts everything in its place."
This statement by A. Gushtin was picked up by many people and spread on the Internet and the press, as the opinion of expert Churkina.
Which led and still leads to great bewilderment of all sane people who have a concept of the anatomy and structure of the human oral cavity.
Sorry, but a forensic forensic expert cannot say that!
It seems to me that the usual disinformation is going on here, which is characteristic of such a mysterious case.
After all, A. Gushtin admitted that he wrote his book precisely by the order of the deputy Prosecutor of the region V. Tuflyakov: "Let me give you the case, you will study it, then we will give you our comments, and you will write them down.
Of course, he pushed me.
And then it was not so easy to research the matter.
It was necessary to formally submit a request, wait a while, then he gave me everything right there.
And moreover, he connected me with experts who later gave me very valuable, I think, comments that really convinced me of my version."
It turns out that it was a kind of state order for allegedly revealing state secrets, how paradoxical it is to hear it, but few people pay attention to this fact.
After all, no one before you could refute these words.
And everyone will believe the words of her son.
Tell me, did your mother really think that the tongue broke off like a piece of ice?
IOM: I have never heard such a version from my mother.
This is made up! I myself was extremely surprised that I read on the forum that "the tongue broke off like an ice..." This is rubbish!!!
For a forensic expert of such a high level as my mother - Genrietta Eliseevna Makushkina (Churkina) to expresses such an absurd version - this is nonsense!
I myself have been engaged in forensic examinations all my life, so I spoke to my mother not as amateurs, but as an experts.
In fact, I have repeatedly heard from my mother various information about the facts of the forensic examination in Dyatlov case.
There was no specific explanation for the missing tongue and eyes of Dubinina.
Mom stated only the fact of the presence of these injuries.
The mechanism of formation and the cause of the damage has not been clarified by anyone.
MP: Thank you so much for refuting this lie about the missing tongue (all the more, the autopsy report mentions that there is no mouth diaphragm), which was spread on the Internet supposedly as a recollection of criminal expert G. Churkina!
I am the administrator of a large social media group on the topic of the tragedy, there are more than 7 thousand people in our group.
And I try to keep less rumors and outright lies on this topic, especially when the “experts” from Komsomolskaya Pravda and Channel One took up the topic of the tragedy, and the cult for the dead Dyatlov group reached its peak.
IOM: Maya, I am very grateful to you for the initiative and work on organizing the site and the forum dedicated to Dyatlov group.
Yes, there are a lot of forums, and they write and invent whatever comes to mind.
The programs of Channel 1 surprised with their superficiality and oversights.
Malakhov’s goal is rating, to the detriment of content.
I wrote to the program, but they did not answer me. Apparently, there is no interest.
Objectivity is not needed!
MP: Igor Olegovich, they’re just airheads!
As you noticed, people unprepared for the topic missed a person like you, but on the other hand, they invited complete strangers of an exotic orientation to the program who could express more delusional versions and fabricated intrigues, and thereby increase the channel’s rating without worrying about quality of information and lowering the bar of professionalism of journalists.
I am sure that the continuation will follow, and they will remember about you, sooner or later they will come to their senses.
Igor Olegovich, if you can, please comment on the following: there were also rumors in the internet about how your mother said that the clothes of the hikers found in the ravine in May after drying had a lilac hue, is this true or not, and was there such a thing at all?
You see, people immediately have a counter question: if the experts noticed the unusual color of the clothes on the bodies found in the stream, they should have examined the cause of this discoloration of the clothes of the dead.
But as we know, in the case file there are no results of such examination.
And people begin to blame the experts B. Vozrozhdenny and G. Churkina for everything, that’s why they didn’t do the tests, they didn’t check...
IOM: Regarding the change of the color...
I remember that it was only about the skin of bodies.
Mom said that the color of the skin was closer to orange.
I do not remember anything said about the purple shade of the belongings.
This is only lately that the case gets such attention, back then... it was just one of her cases she worked on and nothing more.
Now, if we could ask my mom now!
She was at the scene, and was present during the examination of the corpses.
You could say that almost all the material on the case went through her hands.
You say that people begin to blame the experts B. Vozrozhdenny and G. Churkina for everything...
Experts can not be blamed for anything!
An expert is a bonded person who must solve only the issues indicated in the resolution of the investigator.
There is, of course, the concept of “expert initiative”, when the expert himself can answer questions that are not posed to him, but, according to the expert, are significant.
This is not the case!
The case was kept secret, non-disclosures were signed, work was done with constant control "from above", the desire to close and forget was clearly expressed, and so that with the least publicity.
Mom was surprised that at least these examinations were carried out.
Vozrozhdenny - he was generally afraid of his own shadow during these examinations.
The investigation pressured and did not allow to take a single step to the side, limiting only to the most necessary and essential for the procedures.
The goal was rather to close the case, "without noise and dust".
MP: Igor Olegovich, I want to express my gratitude to you for clarifying some of the behind-the-scenes sides of expert life, unknown to the public.
Indeed, some people don't say it, but sometimes I had the thought that the experts were in collusion with the investigation, and some even accused the experts of incompetence.
Your story clarifies a lot by refuting these allegations.
You see, some kind of vicious circle arose here: investigator Korotaev accused the party chiefs and criminal investigator Ivanov of concealing evidence and falsifying the investigation, investigator Ivanov in the mid-90s began to accuse the party authorities of pressure on the investigation, you write that the investigation put pressure on experts.
I wonder who then pressed the party organs?
Of course, this is a joke, I understand that someone pressed and pointed at every specialist related to that investigation.
It’s now from the side all people who are not involved in the matter can criticize the investigation and experts, presenting themselves as bold and courageous.
But experts had families, a career could have collapsed, if anything went against the instructions of higher authorities.
Therefore, every remark of witnesses, every word of truth, clarifying the events that happened then in the investigation and covered over the years with a layer of untruth and unfair accusations, is valuable.
I also want to note that knowledgeable people, professionals, and doctors see the work of forensic expert B. Vozrozhdenny very well, as he tried to walk along the razor's edge, display at least some truth in his brief autopsy, and treat him with respect.
Igor Olegovich, another question that worries many researchers. For some reason, the autopsy reports do not have the signature of your mother, although her last name is indicated.
Was she present as a witness, or in some other capacity?
Can the autopsy report be considered a valid document where there are no signatures of other people present during the investigation of the body, but there is only the signature of the medical examiner Vozrozhdenny, who conducted the examination?
IOM: Mom - she devoted her whole life to forensic examinations and the teaching of forensic science.
By type of activity, of course, she cooperated quite well with forensic doctors, and with some I was on friendly terms, and I personally knew Vozrozhdenny.
Yes, I know this fact and the Vozrozhdenny himself told.
The fact that the Autopsy report does not have the signature of expert Churkina is true.
Mom did not conduct an examination, but only attended the study.
This practice is common.
I myself, as an expert, often attended court medical examinations.
For example, I, as a forensic expert, are presented with clothes with gunshot injuries and weapons, and the corpse, of course, is examined at the forensic bureau.
Conversely, forensic doctors are present when examining clothes from a corpse or weapons in a crime lab.
When related examinations take place in one case, the experts communicate, they are present during the examination, but do not conduct the examination themselves, so there can be no signatures.
By the way, I had a hand in the examination of the remains of Nikolai II and his family.
Maybe it's going to come up one day... maybe...
MP: Igor Olegovich, who developed the films from the Dyatlov group cameras on your opinion?
There could be a film.
Could your mom be developing the films?
Did she tell you anything about film from Dyatlov’s cameras?
IOM: No, Maya, didn't hear anything about developing films from Dyatlov group.
If it were, I think I would know, because I myself was professionally involved in photography and a fact like this fact, I believe, I would have heard.
I myself have worked in the same laboratory for over 10 years.
For all these years I can’t recall a single appeal from the investigating authorities or the prosecutor’s office regarding the processing of photographic materials.
Theoretically, this, of course, is possible, but ready-made materials are provided for the examination, on which the expert has to work.
And present for processing the film taken from the scene?
An expert is not a photographer, this does not fall into his competence.
An investigator can ask as a favor, but then how to process this?
Assign a darkroom...? - also not an option.
What the expert himself filmed during the inspection of the scene is, of course, his business, but other materials practically do not come across.
MP: So, the films from the cameras of the Dyatlov group were developed some place else.
I will give you the recollections of a student as he talked about these films.
Therefore, I had a question, but where did they appear before they got to investigator L.N. Ivanov.
Boris Bychkov: "Having returned from the trek, we learned about the tragedy.
By that time, they had not yet found all the dead, only at the cedar and on the slope...
The next day, E. Chubarev told me that they were waiting for us at the regional prosecutor’s office at Malysheva St, 2b. In addition to Zhenya and me, Yuri Yudin was invited, one who, having left the route due to illness, avoided a sad fate.
We met L.N. Ivanov.
He introduced himself, brought us to the darkroom and explained the task: we should print as many photos as possible from the films of the dead members of the group in order to distribute the pictures to the families of the deceased, as well as to our friends and members of the UPI sports club.
To our question: "why?", Lev Nikitich said a strange, as it seemed to us, phrase: "Someone wants to portray what happened as a result of improper leadership and disagreement in the team."
In the darkroom there was equipment familiar to us: a magnifier, baths, a red lamp, tweezers, developer and fixer paper packs, as well as packages with format 9х12 photo paper.
Y. Yudin did not work with us for long, only the first run of all films.
We printed the photos for two full days.
On some films, after the photographs of the hike, there were frames of corpses made by those who found the dead.
We did not reproduce these frames in many copies, only - two - three.
Unfortunately, there are no frames left in my memory about which V. Yakimenko writes in his article.
Neither I nor Zhenya Chubarev paid any attention to them, for us they were "ruined" frames.
The pictures were the hiking days.
Here they are, joyful, posing during the breaks.
Here they walk with their backpacks.
The latest photographs show how, already at dusk, they level the site and set up a tent..."
Igor Olegovich, in connection with the foregoing, I have an amateur question, I would very much like to clarify this point: although you said that for 10 years you have not dealt with photographic materials, but hypothetically, according to the instructions, if the materials arrived, undeveloped, to the laboratory accidentally, the expert can make a test shot of the camera on that film that is in the camera?
Just click in the lab before you take it out of the camera and start developing?
Or is it not supposed to follow the instructions?
For some reason, I thought that forensic experts are also involved in the examination of photographic materials, and the photographic materials coming from the scene with a resolution of the investigation for development and examination, designed as evidence.
IOM: Maya, if the film is a material evidence, then, of course, the expert cannot shoot anything on this film, because does not have the right to modify the object of study.
The Criminal Laboratory of the Ministry of Justice system is not a photo studio where investigators carry processing photo materials.
If the photo-technical expertise is related directly to photographic materials, as an object of study, then it's a different story.
For example, "whether a photograph was taken by this photo camera", "photographs were printed from this film", etc.
Within the framework of a trace, handwriting or other type of examination, an unprepared object is NEVER presented to an expert.
What is the task of examination?
Develop a film and see what is shot there?
The examination solves the specific issues specified in the investigator’s resolution.
The investigator’s decision to develop the film, as you wrote, does not happen.
At least, in the expert institutions of the Ministry of Justice, where my mother worked, and then I did - such a practice has never been and never is.
The experts of the Ministry of Justice have no operational work, no duties, no trips to the scene.
These experts are stationary.
It is extremely rare and in exceptional isolated cases that these experts are involved in observation and other operational activities.
In the ECC Ministry of Internal Affairs - there is a completely different specificity.
They are created for operational action.
Present from arrival (inspection of the scene, accident, search, etc.) and process the collected materials, develop and print photos, make photo robots, etc.
This is to say that in the expert institutions of the Ministry of Justice they have never been engaged in this kind of activity and are not doing it to this day.
So, expert Churkina could not have developed the films from the scene.
MP: Igor Olegovich, I have a question, what kind of powder and what color is usually used by experts when dusting for fingerprints at the scene?
I am interested in what kind of powder could was used in 1959?
IOM: In past years, there was no particular variety of fingerprint powders.
Magnetic powders of various colors, as now, for example, Malachite, Opal, Topaz, etc., did not exist then.
Before there were:
  • gas soot - black
  • zinc oxide - white
  • reduced iron powder - dark gray


In addition, chemical detection methods were used on porous surfaces (paper, cardboard) - these are 2% solutions in acetone: Ninhydrin (turns purple), Alloxan - in red-orange and nitric acid silver (lapis) - a solution in distilled water (painted in gray-blue color.
Like a lead one might say).
It was also treated (mainly paper) with iodine vapor (tan).
MP: I was very interested in a certain orange powder, which the sister of the deceased Yuri Doroshenko, Irina Rashevskaya, mentions: "Then mother brought Yuri's things.
And what was there?
Not much.
We lived very poorly.
For 4 years of study, mother somehow managed to get him a coat because all he had was a jacket.
This is in the freezing Sverdlovsk.
And she sent him a coat. And this when Yuri was no longer alive.
How did mom cried.
I remember that she was telling and showing a sweatshirt and a sweater, both ruined.
Tinted with orange powder."
Why did things end up in some kind of weird powder.
I am trying to figure this out by excluding versions.
The first version - the powder was left by experts.
The investigator told me that, basically, they always look for traces of sweat (fingerprints), but these traces do not last long on things, so there was no point in looking for them.
They could look for microparticles and microfibres in clothes - this is more relevant.
Maybe, in addition to clothes, there were paper or cardboard or plastic covers in the backpack, and then they were treated with the same alloxan and iodine vapor to find fingerprints, and thereby accidentally stained clothes.
The bodies of Y. Doroshenko was first confused with that of the body of S. Zolotaryov.
If confusion with the identifications began there, then they could fingerprint the corpses in the morgue and compare the obtained fingerprints with the found fingerprints in backpacks on personal belongings of Dyatlov group, some boxes, cases, and the cameras.
But the investigator may still have doubts and the experts may have looked for traces on Y. Doroshenko personal effects and dusted a few items with this mysterious powder.
You, as an expert, what can you say about this unidentified powder?
IOM: I can’t explain this orange powder with which such voluminous objects were processed.
If they are looking for fingerprints, no one will dust the whole object with powder.
In those years, there were no methods for identifying sweat marks on clothing (cloth, knitwear, etc.).
Dusting such objects cannot result in anything.
Only somewhere in the mid-80s, a technique for detecting fingerprints on leather products was introduced, and to this day it is not used on fabrics and other similar materials.
The expert dusts each item with powder separately, selectively and thoroughly, and does not powder the entire item.
If it came to fingerprinting, then who did the examination?
If mom did the trasology on the tent, then where were the other examinations assigned and were they any?
Logically sequentially and, as practice shows, examinations in one case are assigned to one place, and not scattered across different expert institutions.
I do not think that the presence of powder on clothing is the work of an expert.
By the way, traces detected by iodine vapors remain visible for about 15 minutes, so you need to have time to fix them with restored iron.
The yellow color from iodine vapor disappears immediately.
MP: So, experts could not leave any orange powder on Y. Doroshenko's clothes.
Most recently, Irina Rashevskaya, the sister of Yuri Doroshenko, made a new statement about the orange color: "There was no talk about any powder.
It was just that some things were kind of "stained" with orange."
Also, new information appeared on the orange color from Vladimir (ВэйС), who visited the slope of Kholat Syakhl.
Here is what he said: "On June 18 this year, moving along the snowfield, approximately in azimuth 230-240 degrees from the location of the tent and at a distance of 700-800 meters we found an orange-red spot located right on the surface of the snow and penetrating deep into the firn by about 8-10 mm The spot was not plaque-like, as it happens when tree pollen falls on the snow, the snow itself was colored evenly, without spots, on an area of ​​about 300x250 mm...
We slightly dug up the spot, measured it, all this was done without gloves.
Returning to the camp we discovered that this substance stains the clothes quite visibly and persistently and could be wash out only after the second even third time.
Upon returning to Yekaterinburg, photographs and a description of the spot were handed over to specialists of the Institute of Plant and Animal Ecology of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, who easily classified this raid as Watermelon snow (Chlamydomonas nivalis), green unicellular algae.
Below is reference from Wikipedia: Chlamydomonas nivalis - unicellular freshwater green algae with red pigment (carotenoid) astaxanthin (in addition to the green pigment chlorophyll), which causes unusual snow color - red or pink ("snow bloom"), the opposite of thermophilic (thermophilic) algae.
Known for its ability to exist at low temperatures.
In addition to it there are still more than 350 species of such algae.
Once in the atmosphere when water evaporates, they color the snow in shades of black, brown or yellow.
The algae can develop on the surface of water, snow and ice.
It blooms after the darkest and coldest period of winter, with a slight heating of the water, which turns green and, as the weather clears, turns pink or turns red.
Temperature of +4C is already deadly.
Thanks to protection from ultraviolet radiation, which is dangerous for other organisms at heights, it can reproduce at an altitude of up to 3.7 km above sea level.
Latin name is Chlamydomonas nivalis (Bauer) Wille"
IOM: This is really interesting.
I did not understand a bit...
At a positive temperature, these organisms die without a trace?
Or, having died, are able to leave stains for a long time?
If they don’t even wash off immediately, then this is probably the case.
MP: Yes, it is, microorganisms die and leave a color that does not immediately wash off.
Here is another testimony from the slope, Denis Milkov: “Last year, with KAN, in the cedar area between the streams, we found bright orange puddles.
In the area of the alleged search camp on Lozva, our assumptions were based on several sawn trees (height 1-1.5 m.)
We took one such puddle for rust protruding from the ground.
But then Dmitriy came to us and said that he saw the same orange puddles on the slope, going down to the cedar. "
So far, this version still does not convince me to the end.
After all, the algae itself turns red, and the puddles are orange.
It is necessary to conduct an experiment by staining dark things in this algae to find out if the red color turns to orange over time, and in what form and color it is stored on dark clothes.
If dark cotton clothing is stained with orange, then this issue can be considered closed.
It will be one secret less.
IOM: Maya, yes, this is very curious!
A memory somehow pops up...
Yes, indeed, I heard from my mother about orange color of the snow.
Red - orange - these are all shades of red.
Perhaps, under the influence of natural factors, a slight change in shade occurs.
Or maybe the time factor somehow affects the preservation/change in the degree and intensity of the discoloration.
About the color of the snow, no versions, as I recall, were ever discussed.
It was attributed to the general mystery of the incident and the degree of secrecy in which this case was built.
If they rushed it from above, then this is unfair.
There was the version about testing a new weapon, of course.
Changes in the colors of objects were attributed to this from the effects of some substances.
Chemical expertise, as far as I know, was not appointed.
The goal was to close the case as soon as possible, with minimal publicity.
My mother had health problems, so in discussions about possible causes she mentioned this case from expert practice.
She thought, she was exposed to some radiation, or effected by toxic substances.
After all, nobody checked anyone after a trip there.
No tests, no radiation contamination test...
MP: Igor Olegovich, I find very interesting your remark about your mother mentioning the orange snow!
And about the possible radiation contamination on the slope.
You know, Abram Kikoin, a well-known physicist, flew to the slope as the head of a search group.
He taught at UPI.
But according to the memoirs of student P. Bartolomey (now an academician and one of the leaders of the Dyatlov Foundation), Kikoin soon left the slope, according to him, almost the next day after his arrival, leaving the group.
And he flew there with an unknown experimental device, walked along the slope and took some measurements.
His son Konstantin Abramovich Kikoin also spoke about this fact.
Now P.I. Bartolomey is trying to find the person who gave this experimental device to Kikoin.
This man is alive.
And if P.I. Bartholomey finds him, then we will have some information about what was measured there and how much the readings were.
MP: Please allow me to disturb you again, for this reason.
I read a new interview with the journalist A. Gushtin, he says the following: "Anatoly Gushtin: In the late nineties I had the opportunity to repeatedly communicate with a very important witness of those events - Genrietta Eliseevna Makushkina (in 1959 she had a different surname - Churkina).
She did the examination of Dyatlov group tent, which is believed to be cut off by hikers with a knife when, in a panic, scared to death of something or someone, barely clad fled from it down the slope of the Otorten mountain, where then everyone died...
Genrietta Eliseevna was sure that the tent was cut not with an ordinary knife, but with a special one, clearly made of cold steel, but, on the other hand, she perfectly understood that this truth was contraindicated and could even be dangerous.
Therefore, she recorded in the examination exactly what was required of her."
Igor Olegovich, maybe you know what your mother said about the blade?
What were her assumptions?
As I see from the case materials, the knives were not sent for examination, the expert had nothing to compare the cuts of the tent with and whether it was cut precisely by their knives.
But maybe in the family circle, your mother could express her doubts about the blade, what was it like?
IOM: Maya, it’s embarrassing for me to listen to your apology at the expense of my concern.
I am glad to communicate with you, I am glad that at least with a small certainty I can bring clarity to some controversial issues.
About the blade.
There was no talk about this.
I think that if there was such a topic, it would be discussed more than once.
There were always enough knives in the house, including some very interesting specimens.
As a rule, experts have a certain amount of such "stuff".
There were cut damages on the tent, not stab cuts.
By cut damage, it is not even possible to determine the shape of the blade.
Only the presence of a cutting edge - the blade.
You can’t even say if it was double-edged blade (a dagger having 2 cutting blades), or it was a knife.
And as for cold weapons - this, in my opinion, is a far-fetched and given special significance.
Cold weapons are only the presence of certain properties on the weapon, which are mainly characteristic of causing bodily harm.
In the classical sense, cold weapons should not have household and industrial purposes.
Very controversial issue.
There are special knives, for example, medical or used for slaughtering cattle and carvinf meat.
Despite the special conditions of use, such knives will never be considered cold weapons.
It is impossible to determine the type of knife from the cuts in the tent.
MP: Igor Olegovich, it seems, there was evidence that your mother was on a slope.
Former student searcher Y. Blinov told E. Zinoviev that “...
The search group with dogs was abandoned on the first flight, a helicopter.
And the second flight, we flew with Maslennikov ... on the 28th, to the place.
I, a radio operator, some kind of correspondent was the newspaper "Na smenu" a woman I think was a local investigator. " (film 15).
As you know, women, even as newspaper correspondents, were not allowed on the slope.
In search of the Dyatlov group there were only two journalists - Y. Yarovoy and G. Grigoriev.
After I sent this material to Igor Olegovich for review and editing, I received an answer from him: “Maya, I am very grateful to you for your work and initiative.
To be honest, I was even surprised that someone else was dealing with this issue, and not just to dig up the "fried facts", but seriously, with a sincere desire to sort it out and present everything objectively.
Yes, of course, I fully approve of the material that you set out on the basis of our correspondence.
I made some minor amendments, see them, please.

Thank you!
P.S. I apologize for the fact that I don’t reply immediately to your messages, but now I’m busy with other things, and I don’t always have the ability to quickly respond to mail.

Sincerely, Igor Makushkin."



I really wanted Igor Olegovich to tell someday about what impressions his mother had after she visited the scene.
After all, no one knew about this, that forensic expert Genrietta Eliseevna Churkina was at the scene of the tragedy, and, according to her professional duties, studied the footprints found in the snow.
In the Criminal Case, there is no information that the traks were studied by professionals.
And this caused new bewilderment about the work of the investigation.
Now I understand that the work on the slope was carried out, moreover professionally, but not all the results of the work done by the experts were included in the criminal case known to us, as well as other very important documents.
I would also like to get answers on questions about the physical and technical examination of Dyatlov group tent, and read the notes of I.O. Makushkin on the so-called "royal examination" - identification of the remains of the family of Nikolai the Second.
With deep respect to I.O. Makushkin, G.E. Churkina and the entire glorious team of forensic experts,

Maya Piskareva
Maya Piskareva © 26 May 2013


















#1122 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 20 wrzesień 2019 - 20:06




In this infamous case there is a persistent talk about brown-red or orange discoloration of the of skin of the victims and their clothes.
Lets track this claims to their origin, and see what they amount to.

Case files


All autopsies were performed in the morgue of Ivdel central department hospital, PO Box №240 in daylight and sunny weather.
4 Mar 1959
  • Doroshenko autopsy report (case files 104-111)
    The skin of the face is brown-purple color.
    (Russ - кожный покров лица буролилового цвета.)
  • Krivonischenko autopsy report (case files 112-119)
    The skin of the face is blue-grey color.
    (Russ - Кожные покровы лица синюшно-серого цвета.)
  • Dyatlov autopsy report (case files 120-126)
    The facial skin is of a bluish red color.
    (Russ - Кожные покровы лица синюшнокрасноватого цвета.)
  • Kolmogorova autopsy report (case files 127-134)
    The skin of the face and hands is purple-red color.
    (Russ - Кожные покровы лица и кистей рук лиловокрасного цвета.)


8 Mar 1959
  • Slobodin autopsy report (case files 95-103)
    The skin of the face is blue-red color.
    (Russ - кожные покровы лица синюшно-красноватого цвета.)


9 May 1959
  • Kolevatov autopsy report (case files 345-348)
    The soft tissue of the face is thin, flaccid and of a dirty grey color.
    (Russ - Мягкие ткани лица дряблые истончены, грязно-серого цвета.)
  • Zolotaryov autopsy report (case files 349-351)
    The facial skin is of greenish grey color.
    (Russ - Кожные покровы лица зеленоватосерого цвета.)
  • Thibeaux-Brignolle autopsy report (case files 352-354)
    The skin of the face, body and limbs is of a grey-greenish color.
    (Russ - Кожные покровы лица, туловища и конечностей серозеленоватого цвета.)
  • Dubinina autopsy report (case files 355-357)
    The skin of the face is of yellowish brown color.
    (Russ - Кожные покровы лица желтоватоскоричневого цвета.)



9 Mar 1959 funerals, Zina's open coffin
Witness testimony of Rimma Kolevatova given on April 14 (Case files pages 270-272).
This is before the body of her brother was found: "I was present at all the funerals of the group.
Why were their faces and hands all so dark brown ?
How can we explain the fact that the four of them who were beside the fire, they were obviously alive, why didn’t they try to return to the tent?
If they were considerably better dressed, as far as I can see from clothes missing from the tent... if it was a natural disaster, then for sure, after being warmed by the fire, then the guys would have crawled back to the tent.
The whole group wouldn’t have perished from an Arctic storm!"
9 Mar 1959 funerals, Zina and Doroshenko open coffins
Yuri Kuntsevitch, the head of the Dyatlov Foundation in Yekaterinburg, remembers: “At that time I lived next to the cemetery, and was 12 years old, so I was really interested.
I tried to push through the crowd to see everything, but it was impossible.
I was amazed by some of the people in the crowd.
They were wearing trilby style felt hats and had jodhpurs or motorcycle riding pants.
They were supervising the procession with their faces blank, expressing nothing.
I was standing on a pile of earth at the graveside and I was about eight meters from the bodies.
Their skin had a somewhat brick color , and I saw some of the students helping to lower the coffins to the graves.
It was said they were there despite being forbidden to leave their classes to attend."



At the autopsies the color of the bodies was normal for the 3+ weeks and 3 months respectively exposure to the elements after the 5 days of snow reflective sunburn.
You can see from the visualization the shades that a corpse is going though in his normal cycle of decay after frostbite.
The first time the mysterious dark red, brick color is noticed at the funerals.
What happens between the autopsies and the funerals, especially when the caskets are going to be open?
Prep work by a mortician.
If you try to color the shades you read about in the autopsy reports, especially if the mortician is not the best, what kind of color do you think is gonna come out?
Looks at the colors from the autopsies.
And only the bodies found in March were seen off in open caskets.
From the hikers found in May only Dubinina's father was allowed to see the body of his daughter and sources say he fainted.
Nobody is discussing the color of their faces.
Also there are recollections for the contrary, that the bodies were of a natural color for the state they were in.
But these reports are not so sensational to repeat.
In this case only what is shocking seem to make it to the surface.
Georgiy Karpushin
Georgiy Karpushin, senior navigator of the 123rd flight detachment of the Ural Civil Aviation Administration remembers: "I can argue, since I saw the bodies of the deceased, that they were of a natural color, and not of any orange color, as they later said."
1962 Genrietta Eliseevna Churkina (Makushkina) at her desk
In 1999 medical forensic expert (specializing in tissues) Genrieta Eliseevna Churkina (now Makushkina) speaks about the coloring of the clothes on the bodies found in May.
She was present at their autopsies:
"I was present during the medical examination of the bodies conducted by Boris Vozrozhdenny.
I remember well when they took off their clothes and hung them on ropes, we immediately noticed that they had some strange light purple hue , although their natural colors were different.
I asked Boris - Don't you think that the clothes are processed with something? - He agreed."
Her son Igor Olegovich Makushkin doesn't remmebr anything about tohave been said about dicoloraion fo the clothes, but he remembers talk about orange snow.
Irina Rashevskaya (Doroshenko) with her son Yuri
In 2011 Irina Nikolaevna Rashevskaya, sister of Yuri Doroshenko, writes a letter to "Internet Center of Dyatlov Group Tragedy" in which she says: "We were very poor.
For 4 years of study, mother somehow managed to get Yuri a coat because all he had was a jacket.
This is in the freezing Sverdlovsk. Unthinkable.
And she sent him a coat.
And this when Yuri was no longer alive.
How did mom cried.
I remember that she was telling and showing a sweatshirt and a sweater, both ruined.
Tinted with orange powder.
It seems all the dead were orange ."
Later on Irina Nikolaevna recounts the powder part, she remembers only that the clothes were tinted orange.
Irina didn't know much of what is going on with her brother Yuri because according to her own words "When Yuri entered UPI, we left for Kazakhstan.
I was 10 years old.
When Yuri died, I was 13 years old."
It is all hearsay.
Yuri was closer with his brother Volodya, who was 3 years younger, studied in UPI and died from a heart ascending Elbrus in 2008.




Mansi are using ocher

Mansi are using ocher to decorate their sleds and yurts.
One theory says that Mansi guarded the deceased from Dyatlov group before the search parties got to them.
They tried to help their souls with the transition in worthy afterlife according to their believes.
Maybe trying to talk to the departed souls.
Mansi are using ocher to decorate their sleds and yurts.
Read the reserach below about the use of the red and derivative color hues in the religion of the tribes from same family.
On the basis of investigating traditional clothing of the Ob Ugrians the author considers questions of colour symbols.
For reconstruction of certain modes of colour-marking, she attracts materials on clothing of the neighbouring peoples as well as those of the Finnish-lingual people of the Volga basin related to the Ob Ugrians.
"... The reddish color, embodied by ocher and other dyes (in Ob's blackheads, is a decoction of the larch bark, the paint from the plant Pomegranate, etc.), in archaic cultures associated with blood - a relevant force, a topical beginning.
Thus, in the Mansi, the kellankwe verb 'dye' is etymologically close to the word kelp 'blood, bright red, red' [Romandeev, Kuzakov, 1982, pp. 235-236].
In primitive thinking, blood had magical powers, including rejuvenating, invigorating and purifying qualities.
In accordance with it it was used: drank, smeared the body, sprinkled, etc. [Levi-Bruhl, 1994, pp. 522-523].
According to the field materials of the 1991 expedition, even in the middle of the twentieth century, the Lyapin Mansi had a tradition of drinking only the killed deer, which was attributed to its medicinal properties.
Notwithstanding that, in primitive thinking, the use of blood or a substitute (reddish paint) on the body or articles of clothing and everyday life gave them certain characteristics that could protect a person and satisfy his needs.
Z.P. Sokolova [1972, p. 59] described the funeral ritual of the Khanty rivers of the Sini and Kunovata, the entry of the tombstone..." Source Colour-symbols-in-Ob-Ugrians-traditional-clothing.pdf
Blood snow, watermelon snow, red snow - odd phenomenon caused by a cold-loving algae
Vladimir (ВэйС) visited the slope of Kholat Syakhl in 2013.
"On June 18 this year, moving along the snowfield, approximately in azimuth 230-240 degrees from the location of the tent and at a distance of 700-800 meters we found an orange-red spot located right on the surface of the snow and penetrating deep into the firn by about 8-10 mm The spot was not plaque-like, as it happens when tree pollen falls on the snow, the snow itself was colored evenly, without spots, on an area of ​​about 300x250 mm... We slightly dug up the spot, measured it, all this was done without gloves.
Returning to the camp we discovered that this substance stains the clothes quite visibly and persistently and could be wash out only after the second even third time.
Upon returning to Yekaterinburg, photographs and a description of the spot were handed over to specialists of the Institute of Plant and Animal Ecology of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, who easily classified this raid as Watermelon snow (Chlamydomonas nivalis), green unicellular algae.
Below is reference from Wikipedia: Chlamydomonas nivalis - unicellular freshwater green algae with red pigment (carotenoid) astaxanthin (in addition to the green pigment chlorophyll), which causes unusual snow color - red or pink ("snow bloom"), the opposite of thermophilic (thermophilic) algae.
Known for its ability to exist at low temperatures.
In addition to it there are still more than 350 species of such algae.
Once in the atmosphere when water evaporates, they color the snow in shades of black, brown or yellow.
The algae can develop on the surface of water, snow and ice. It blooms after the darkest and coldest period of winter, with a slight heating of the water, which turns green and, as the weather clears, turns pink or turns red.
Temperature of +4C is already deadly.
Thanks to protection from ultraviolet radiation, which is dangerous for other organisms at heights, it can reproduce at an altitude of up to 3.7 km above sea level.
Latin name is Chlamydomonas nivalis (Bauer) Wille"
Orange spheres in the sky
There are many sightings of light balls in the sky in this period of time and area.
I am going to address all of them - more than 20, in a separate publication, here I am citing the only one where it says that the phenomenon was orange-red in color.
Valentin Gerasimovich Yakimenko says that on 03/31/1959 a large ball of fire was moving directly at them from southeast.
The phenomenon lasted 20 minutes, and then disappeared behind the height of "880".
Before this, "a star appeared from the center of the ball, which gradually increased to the size of the moon, began to fall down, separating from the sphere."
The same was observed on February 17 throughout the Northern Urals (from Tagil to Ivdel).
“The ball moved silently,” says Valentin Gerasimovich Yakimenko, a participant in the search in 1959.
“It was orange-red, the size of a rising moon.”
Gradually, the circle was losing its features, blurring.
We experienced curiosity rather than fear ... Inside the ball, the movement of the jets was felt, the body itself resembled a plasma.
And, probably, that's why we had the idea of ​​ball lightning.
But this is only an assumption, no more... – Kizilov
The theory circulating the interent is: "Orange spheres were sighted in the sky on the night the Dyatlov group died by campers about 50 miles away from the scene; some explained these away as R-7 intercontinental missile launches, seeing as the last campsite was located on the pathway from Baikonur Cosmodrone to Chyornaya Guba, a Soviet nuclear testing ground."
I have many problems with this statement:
  1. They mean Mt Chistop 34.2 km (21 miles) from Dyatlov Pass. At the time of the tragedy there was nothing there, only wolves. 20 years after the incident a radar station was installed on Mt Chistop, which existed until the 90s. The situation of this military facility is not conditioned by anything, which gave an additional reason for many researchers to talk about the "cosmic" trail of the tragedy.
  2. Another aspect is that it doesn't make any sense for the Soviets to launch nuclear rocket to their own test base (Baikonur - Chyornaya Guba).
  3. Besides 1959 and 1960 have no testing, a bilateral moratorium between the USSR and the US, officially beginning 31 Oct 1958. Source Wikipedia
There is no much left from Chyornaya Guba.

















#1123 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 29 wrzesień 2019 - 19:45

Interview with Yuri's elder brother - Konstantin Krivonischenko


All rights belong to Komsomolskaya Pravda.
Yuri (Georgiy) Alekseevich Krivonischenko
Yuri Krivonischenko, along with Yuri Doroshenko, was found one and a half kilometers from the tent in the forest under the cedar.
It is believed that both Yuri died the very first, since all the outer clothing was cut off by other hikers in order to warm themselves.
According to the examination, Krivonischenko and Doroshenko died from hypothermia.
But at the same time, chopped branches were found right under the cedar.
Why both Yuri froze in a calm forest near a fire and in the presence of firewood is unclear.
Our correspondents met with Yuri's elder brother - Konstantin Krivonischenko.
Konstantin Krivonischenko with wife Nina Panteleevna
To many researchers of this tragedy, Yuri Krivonischenko seems to be a rather mysterious person.
It is known that he worked at the Mayak secret nuclear enterprise.
It is believed that he was a KGB recruit.
Yuri’s clothes turned out to be radioactive.
For some reason, Yuri Krivonischenko, as well as another victim - Semyon Zolotaryov, was buried separately from other hikers in a prestigious and already closed city cemetery.
Camping photo: Yuri in the center on a raft in a scarf
Yuri’s brother, Konstantin Alekseevich, now lives in Kiev.
This is what he told us.
– In 1959 I lived in the Urals.
I worked at the Verkhniy Tagil state district power station as shift supervisor of the electric shop.
There were three brothers in our family.
I am born in 1931, Yuri - 1935, Igor - 1539.
I was left alone, the oldest.

What to say about Yuri?
He was a sociable and cheerful guy.
He wrote very emotional poems.
His favorite song was "I love you, life, and I hope that it is mutual".
And when he died, our mother found a piece of basalt, attached a silvered plate with an engraving on it with this line from Yuri’s favorite song.
She put it on a shelf in memory of Yuri.
– How did you find out about the Yuri's death?
– I don’t remember how it happened.
I know that they did not get in touch on time.
They began to look for them.
The bodies of the first five hikers were discovered.
And Yuri was among them.
Krivonischenko's father saved by Stalin
– It is known that your father was the construction manager of the Beloyarsk State District Power Station.
That is, the man is quite important, and he sought the truth about the death of Yuri, using his authority.
– Yes, he led a huge strategic construction site and was promoted to Major General.
I can tell you a story about his authority.
In 1949 father came under investigation.
Echelons with cement were brought to the construction site before the scheduled plan.
Since the warehouses had not yet been built, there was nowhere to unload the cement.
A case was brought against my father in the prosecutor's office and he could be punished very harshly.
But, as he later told us, they call him again to the prosecutor, and tell him that the case is closed, to continue work.
My father out of the corner of his eye saw a telegram on the prosecutor's desk saying: “Do not touch Krivonischenko.
Joseph Stalin".
That's it about authority.
Therefore, father managed to get Yuri to be buried where the parents decided.
When father returned from the morgue with identification, he was simply silent.
I began to ask him.
Have you seen Yuri?
He answered, yes, he saw him.
And he didn't uttered a word after this. Before the funeral, Yuri was put in a closed zinc coffin.
He was not brought inside the house; they laid him in the yard.
Then they put the coffin in the church at the cemetery.
There was no service.
It was not allowed back then.
Then mom said - leave me alone.
Everyone left the church.
She was there for about 10 minutes, probably crying.
Then they buried him and that's all...
– And after that, did you father eaver talked about Yuri in the morgue?
Was his color unusual?
– He did not say anything.
He didn’t want to upset us.
But the members of the search groups talked at the wake that the corpses were all black.
– But, probably, years later, this tragedy was remembered in the family, and your father said something about the reason hikers died?
– No, never.
All we knew was that the tent was torn with a knife, and they came out through these holes.
It was only later that conversations began that there could be some kind of military test.
They also said that it was a rocket that flew to Novaya Zemlya from Kazakhstan, but fell.
– Do you think that if your father never talked, and did not make assumptions about the death of Yuri, then perhaps he knew the whole truth?
Only it was such a truth that he could not divulge according to the harsh rules of the time?
– Everything is possible.
Perhaps it was warned.
But I don't know.
Even when dad and I were gathering at the table, there was no talk about this topic.
If I asked my father, he avoided responding.
He died, dead, and that's it, an accident.
If father knew something, he didn't have time to say it.
He died suddenly in 1970.
He was 63 years old.
What did Yuri's father know from eyewitnesses
In this regard, it is interesting to recall Krivonischenko's father testimony from the case files.
We give it completely with all grammar errors.
Krivonischenko witness testimony
Sheet 273
witness testimony
On April 14, 1959, the prosecutor criminologist of Sverdlovsk region Romanov interrogated as a witness in District Prosecution Office, in compliance with Article 162-168 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the RSFSR
  1. Surname, name and middle name: Krivonischenko Aleksey Konstantinovich
  2. Year of birth 1907
  3. Place of birth: city of Dnepropetrovsk, Ukraine
  4. Nationality: Ukrainian
  5. Political affiliation: member of the CPSU since 1947
  6. Education (which school graduated and when): Higher education
  7. Occupation: a) currently (place of work and position): the head of the management of "Uralenergostroyekhanizatsiya"
    b) at the moment of the events: the same
  8. Criminal record: no
  9. Permanent residence (exact address and telephone number): Sverdlovsk, 29 Moscow St, аpt 27, ph D-1-96-30, work ph D-1-21-36
  10. Passport:
  11. Relation to the accused: -
Warned on the responsibility for the first part of Art. 92 of the Criminal Code of the RSFSR for refusing to testify and under Art. 95 Criminal Code of the RSFSR for giving knowingly false testimony is forewarned.
Krivonischenko (signature)
Witness testified: After the funeral of my son on March 9, 1959, I had students over at the apartment, participants in the search for the nine hikers.
Among them were those hikers who at the end of January and the beginning of February were on an expedition in the north, a little bit to the south of Mount Otorten.
There were apparently at least two such groups, at least the participants of the two groups said that they had seen the light phenomenon that struck them on February 1 north of the location of these groups: the extremely bright glow of some kind of rocket or projectile.
The glow was so strong, that some of the hikers that were already inside the tent and getting ready to go to sleep, were alarmed by this glow, went out of the tent and observed this phenomenon.
After a while they heard a sound like a strong thunder from far away.
I don't know the names of those who said that, because I have never seen them before and I don’t know them, but obviously the students who saw and heard this light and sound phenomenon can be tracked, as there were several people, and it was not difficult to determine which groups were in the North at that time.
The students said that they had observed a similar phenomenon twice: on the first and the seventh of February 1959.
The students said that near the fire under the cedar were found belongings that were not on the deceased - my son and Doroshenko, at the same time, they didn't have shoes but there were socks laying around.
We can assume that there were more people at the cedar tree than the two found there dead.
The rest must have gone away when two
Krivonischenko (signature)
Sheet 274
were already dead, or if they were still alive and left at the campfire like a temporary base - then the abandoned did not see the clothes, since when freezing they would have probably put on everything that could get their hands on.
The students said that the fire at the cedar didn't go off due to lack of wood, but because nobody maintained it.
This, too, obviously could be either because people who were at the fire did not see what to do, or because they were already blind or dead (blinded) mistake signature.
They say that a few meters from the fire there were dry branches fallen from a tree that were not used.
In the presence of a fire, it was not possible not to see something that could be easily used, so being blind seems like possible explanation.
Both hikers found at the campfire gradually lost sight (but very quickly) and although they could maintain the fire wile the wood lasted - they could not do it after they couldn't see what to do.
They froze after they were already dead.
This is only a guess of mine.
Krivonischenko (signature)
Interrogated (signature)
Shortly before his death, Yuri resigned
To clarify.
The Mayak dissaster occurred on September 29, 1957. And Yuri, for sure, came under exposure there.
His relation with the company soon went south.
The family archive contains Yuri's letter of resignation dated August 15, 1958.
Yuri Krivonischenko letter of resignation
"Please provide me with payment and accept my resignation at my own request from the company PO Box 404/10 due to complete unwillingness to work in this system".
The resolution of the authorities on the letter is: "We can not find a reason for dismissal.
It is necessary to fulfill the order of the head of the enterprise and begin work on the site "Ozero".
But Yuri still quit.
He took a break and went to Otorten.
It is possible that Krivonischenko went on the expedition in the same clothes in which he had been at the enterprise.
This means that the radioactive elements found on his sweater and pants (only a sweater - ed. note) could be picked up while working on the rehabilitation site "Ozero".
– Other researchers say that your father, in response to a request to higher authorities, received a paper with the resolution "guilty party is punished"?
– I did not see such paper and did not hear anything about it.
– What do you think happened there?
– Most likely the tests were unsuccessful.
In those days, there were rumors.
Somewhere near this pass was a military unit.
And then in the middle of the night suddenly they saw some kind of glow in the sky.
The soldiers jumped out of the barracks.
And allegedly some soldiers went to a psychiatric hospital.
This is what people said.
– And what happened after 1959 in your family?
– Father was appointed construction manager of the Beloyarsk nuclear power plant in the Urals.
He built it.
And when the installation of the nuclear equipment began, he was transferred to Pavlodar.
In the early 60s, he asked to be sent to Ukraine.
And he was returned to his homeland.
Yuri’s mom didn’t part with her son’s belongings
– What did your mother say about the tragedy?
– She never talked about this either.
– As for their mother, - Nina Panteleevna, the wife of Konstantin Alekseevich, entered into the conversation, - she always kept under her bed a suitcase with Yuri’s belongings - a sweatshirt, mittens and a hat, in which he went on this last trip.
A large portrait of Yuri hung in the room.
And on the day of his death, his mother sat in front of this portrait and cried silently.
I have to admit that we were afraid of this suitcase, suspecting that things in it could be radioactive.
And we have a child.
But my mother lived with a suitcase until 83 years of age and nothing.
And when she was gone, then we buried the suitcase.
– Why did you decide that there are radioactive items?
– At the moment I can’t even imagine why, but for some reason back in the time there were such fears.
– When Yuri’s things were found on the pass, it was on his pants and on his sweater that traces of radioactivity were discovered.
– After graduating from UPI, - Konstantin Alekseevich explained, - in the early summer of 1957, Yuri got a job at the now infamous Mayak plant.
I don’t know exactly what my brother was doing there, he said that he had soldiers under his command.
And soon at the enterprise there was an explosion of a storage.
There was a fairly large emission of radiation.
This is a known fact.
It is quite possible that he brought this radiation on clothes from the enterprise.
After all, if he had soldiers under his command, then he probably participated in the liquidation of the consequences of the explosion.
After that, he quit, got transferred somewhere and went on vacation.
He did not return from this vacation.
We thank Konstantin Alekseevich and Nina Panteleevna for the warm welcome and for sharing these memories.
We took some of Yuri's poems from the family archive.
They may seem imperfect to someone, but they tell us a lot about the character of this person.
Let Yuri rest in peace, as well as his comrades in this tragic expedition.
Yuri Krivonischenko with a friend. Perhaps it was to her that he dedicated his poems.
Skis in the corner, backpack on the closet,
Mandolin hanging on the wall.
Photo Album. Letters from friends,
Hiking treks - only in dreams…
Abandoned by fate to devil's horns:
There is no talk of mountains here,
Everyone calls me "fanatic"
They shed "crocodile tears".
And laugh, dipping noses in furs,
In life you will never know,
A snowstorm in the mountains,
How the wind plays the taiga.
You will never know grander,
When resting at the top,
And hundreds kilometers along
The green sea of the forests.
You will never see how rocks fall down,
How does the "Sayan vains" grow,
You have never seen the horns of a red deer
And roaring down stream from a clif.
You meet both winter and summer
Behind the double frame of the window,
And don't know the "power"
of sleeping by the fire in winter.
What do you boast about laughing at me?
With ignorance of your vast country?
Going to London, Paris, New York
To dance rock and roll, eat a couple of lobster
To buy fancy pants!
I feel sorry for you!
Y. Krivonischenko.
I look at the burning fire.
Pink glowing flames won't last.
Comrades asleep, the day was dire.
Why can't you be with us?

Where on the world are you now
With a backpack and an ice axe,
What road are you dealt now
Always exploring the fate?
Maybe you’re making your way through the taiga
Knee-deep in the swamp waters,
Or wander under the ruthless sun
Somewhere in the Kazakhstan steppe?
Maybe you are in the snow of the Arctic,
And the blizzard sweeps your track?
Maybe this early morning
You meet the dawn in the Pamirs?
Covered with road dust
Hundreds of miles away from home,
Maybe your night is starless
And you don't think about me?
And you don’t know how often at nights
I move closer to the fire
And remembering you with longing,
I sing this sad song...
I look at the burning fire.
Pink glowing flames won't last.
Comrades asleep, the day was dire.
Why can't you be with us?
Y. Krivonischenko
Yuri Krivonischenko has beautiful sense of rhythm and rhyme that I haven't taken the time to match, translated word for word, except the strophe in italic, that repeats at the beginning and at the end of the Campfire poem.


















#1124 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 29 wrzesień 2019 - 19:48

On 15 Aug 1958 Yuri Krivonischenko hands his letter of resignation "due to complete unwillingness to work in this system".


This does not sound like a whim.


Something happened and we will never know what exactly.


To me it doesn't sound just like harsh conditions for work.


Something completely ticked him off.


It is not clear as of what happened after that.


Mayak enterprise not only rejects the resignation but sends Yuri to one of the most polluted constructions site "Ozero".


Only because of this resolution we know where was Yuri working when he went to Otorten.


In the following thread it seems mail is not going through for some reason, but it speaks of the persistent inquiry of a facility which allegedly no more employs Krivonichenko, on the document dated 24 April 1959 it even calls him "former" engineer.


According to Alexey Rakitin Yuri Krivonischneko was not relieved of duties but reassigned, probably with the connections his father had, to a secret department of which even his former employers didn't know about.































#1125 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 29 wrzesień 2019 - 19:51

29 Sep 1957 ― The day Russia nuked itself ― The Kyshtym disaster


The Kyshtym disaster was a radioactive contamination accident that occurred on 29 September 1957 at Mayak, a plutonium production site for nuclear weapons and nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in the Soviet Union.


It measured as a Level 6 disaster on the International Nuclear Event Scale (INES), making it the third most serious nuclear accident ever recorded, behind the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster and the Chernobyl disaster (both Level 7 on the INES).


Yuri Krivonischenko from Dyatlov group worked there and participated in the cleaning of the contamination.


Radioactive clothes found on the dead hikers, ring a bell?



















#1126 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 29 wrzesień 2019 - 20:09



The day Russia nuked itself: The Kyshtym disaster
The Kyshtym disaster was a radioactive contamination accident that occurred on 29 September 1957 at Mayak, a plutonium production site for nuclear weapons and nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in the Soviet Union.
It measured as a Level 6 disaster on the International Nuclear Event Scale (INES), making it the third most serious nuclear accident ever recorded, behind the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster and the Chernobyl disaster (both Level 7 on the INES).
The event occurred in the town of Ozyorsk, Chelyabinsk Oblast, a closed city built around the Mayak plant.
Since Ozyorsk/Mayak (named Chelyabinsk-40, then Chelyabinsk-65, until 1994) was not marked on maps, the disaster was named after Kyshtym, the nearest known town.
After World War II, the Soviet Union lagged behind the US in development of nuclear weapons, so it started a rapid research and development program to produce a sufficient amount of weapons-grade uranium and plutonium.
The Mayak plant was built in haste between 1945 and 1948.
Gaps in Soviet physicists' knowledge about nuclear physics at the time made it difficult to judge the safety of many decisions.
Environmental concerns were not taken seriously during the early development stage.
Initially Mayak was dumping high-level radioactive waste into a nearby river, which flowed to the river Ob, flowing further down to the Arctic Ocean.
All six reactors were on Lake Kyzyltash and used an open cycle cooling system, discharging contaminated water directly back into the lake.
When Lake Kyzyltash quickly became contaminated, Lake Karachay was used for open-air storage, keeping the contamination a slight distance from the reactors but soon making Lake Karachay the "most polluted spot on Earth".
A storage facility for liquid nuclear waste was added around 1953.
It consisted of steel tanks mounted in a concrete base, 8.2 meters underground.
Because of the high level of radioactivity, the waste was heating itself through decay heat (though a chain reaction was not possible).
For that reason, a cooler was built around each bank containing 20 tanks.
Facilities for monitoring operation of the coolers and the content of the tanks were inadequate.



In 1957 the cooling system in one of the tanks containing about 70–80 tons of liquid radioactive waste failed and was not repaired.
The temperature in it started to rise, resulting in evaporation and a chemical explosion of the dried waste, consisting mainly of ammonium nitrate and acetates (see ammonium nitrate/fuel oil bomb).
The explosion, on 29 September, 1957, estimated to have a force of about 70–100 tons of TNT, threw the 160-ton concrete lid into the air.
There were no immediate casualties as a result of the explosion, but it released an estimated 20 MCi (800 PBq) of radioactivity.
Most of this contamination settled out near the site of the accident and contributed to the pollution of the Techa River, but a plume containing 2 MCi (80 PBq) of radionuclides spread out over hundreds of kilometers.
Previously contaminated areas within the affected area include the Techa river which had previously received 2.75 MCi (100 PBq) of deliberately dumped waste, and Lake Karachay which had received 120 MCi (4,000 PBq).
In the next 10 to 11 hours, the radioactive cloud moved towards the north-east, reaching 300–350 kilometers from the accident.
The fallout of the cloud resulted in a long-term contamination of an area of more than 800 to 20,000 square kilometers (depending on what contamination level is considered significant), primarily with caesium-137 and strontium-90.
This area is usually referred to as the East-Ural Radioactive Trace (EURT).



At least 22 villages were exposed to radiation from the disaster, with a total population of around 10,000 people evacuated.
Some were evacuated after a week but it took almost 2 years for evacuations to occur at other sites.



Vague reports of a "catastrophic accident" causing "radioactive fallout over the Soviet and many neighboring states" began appearing in the western press between 13 and 14 April 1958, and the first details emerged in the Viennese paper Die Presse on 17 March 1959.
But it was only in 1976 that Zhores Medvedev made the nature and extent of the disaster known to the world.
In the absence of verifiable information, exaggerated accounts of the disaster were given.
People "grew hysterical with fear with the incidence of unknown 'mysterious' diseases breaking out.
Victims were seen with skin 'sloughing off' their faces, hands and other exposed parts of their bodies."
Medvedev's description of the disaster in the New Scientist was initially derided by western nuclear industry sources, but the core of his story was soon confirmed by Professor Leo Tumerman, former head of the Biophysics Laboratory at the Engelhardt Institute of Molecular Biology in Moscow.
The true number of fatalities remains uncertain because radiation-induced cancer is clinically indistinguishable from any other cancer, and its incidence rate can only be measured through epidemiological studies.
One book claims that "in 1992, a study conducted by the Institute of Biophysics at the former Soviet Health Ministry in Chelyabinsk found that 8,015 people had died within the preceding 32 years as a result of the accident."
By contrast, only 6,000 death certificates have been found for residents of the Techa riverside between 1950 and 1982 from all causes of death, though perhaps the Soviet study considered a larger geographic area affected by the airborne plume.
The most commonly quoted estimate is 200 deaths due to cancer, but the origin of this number is not clear.
More recent epidemiological studies suggest that around 49 to 55 cancer deaths among riverside residents can be associated to radiation exposure.
This would include the effects of all radioactive releases into the river, 98% of which happened long before the 1957 accident, but it would not include the effects of the airborne plume that was carried north-east.
The area closest to the accident produced 66 diagnosed cases of chronic radiation syndrome, providing the bulk of the data about this condition.
To reduce the spread of radioactive contamination after the accident, contaminated soil was excavated and stockpiled in fenced enclosures that were called "graveyards of the earth".
The Soviet government in 1968 disguised the EURT area by creating the East Ural Nature Reserve, which prohibited any unauthorised access to the affected area.
According to Gyorgiy, who invoked the Freedom of Information Act to gain access to the relevant Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) files, the CIA knew of the 1957 Mayak accident since 1959, but kept it secret to prevent adverse consequences for the fledgling American nuclear industry.
Starting in 1989 the Soviet government gradually declassified documents pertaining to the disaster.

Current situation


The level of radiation in Ozyorsk itself at about 0.1 mSv a year is claimed to be safe for humans, but the area of the EURT is still heavily contaminated with radioactivity.
Because of the secrecy surrounding Mayak, the populations of affected areas were not initially informed of the accident.
A week later (on 6 October) an operation for evacuating 10,000 people from the affected area started, still without giving an explanation of the reasons for evacuation.

















#1127 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 29 wrzesień 2019 - 20:12

The Mayak nuclear plant in the Southern Urals was the Soviet Union's primary nuclear complex built after the Second World War and included a set of plutonium production reactors, fuel production facilities, and reprocessing and waste storage buildings.


From the start of its operation, the nuclear plant faced many problems related to the lack of health and safety measures.


On September 29, 1957 one of the Mayak plant’s cooling systems failed and a storage tank with radioactive liquid waste exploded. Out of 270,000 directly affected people, only 11,000 were evacuated, which took more than two years.


This nuclear accident was evaluated to be the third in its magnitude after Chernobyl and Fukushima, however it was kept in secret for 20 years.


Besides pollution from the accident, between 1948 and 1956 radioactive waste from the nuclear plant was poured directly into the Techa River, a source of drinking water for 124,000 people.


In addition, the Russian Government has adopted legislation to import spent nuclear fuel from other countries, reprocess and store it permanently in the Mayak plant.























#1128 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 29 wrzesień 2019 - 20:30



Written by Galina Sazonova.
This is part of a much longer conversation.

Graffiti in header by Banksy
1) a "secret" was created back in 1959, and the state used large resources to find the group.
This was especially true of the last four, "by all means, do not stop searching".
And our state was always worried about global problems and never worried about the lives of individual people and groups, many died before that, and after that there were many (and in the same UPI), but the effort was never this massive.
2) this "secret" still exist, which follows from some archival issues.
Well, we know for sure that there are still documents, we know where they are and we know that they are still classified under the heading of secrecy.
And no appeals to the SC and the prosecutor’s office help to declassify these documents.
I'm talking about party archives now.
What could be the reason for such a long state secret?
Only issues of national security and defense.
But at the same time, we have already declassified all military documents (defense, test version), we have already admitted how in 1954 they dropped an atomic bomb over troops and villages to see “what will happen”, we have already declassified the failed tests at Baykonur, when people died (rocket exploded at the launch pad), including General Nedelin.
What is the reason to maintain in secret the deaths of the 9 hikers?
All launches are already described, tests too.
Therefore, I exclude the interests of the Ministry of Defense.
What's left?
The interests of the state and its security, what the KGB did.
And, agree, such an event should be significant and major.
What was going on in the world in general at that time?
We had a Kyshtym disaster in 1957.
And the most interesting thing about it is that the accident was recognized by USSR only in the mid-90s, 40 years after the fact.
But the causes of the catastrophe have not yet been published.
All investigation documents are classified to this day and until the 1990s information about the accident could only be found from CIA sources.
In them the accident is not as big as Chernobyl, it is attributed to negligence.
They don’t make movies about it, and in whole is hardly known to the general public.
And now I’ll try to explain to you in few words, what did Kyshtym mean at that time.
The nuclear project was officially launched by the parties around 1942 — by us, the Germans and the Americans.
Moreover, the Germans in some respects were far ahead of us and the Americans.
Their problem (to our delight) was that they initially took the path of not creating weapons (Hitler was strange, he believed in mysticism and did not really believe in science), but to create reactors as sources of energy.
They tried to create nuclear submarines even then, which would bring their fleet very forward.
And only towards the very end of the war, perhaps they tested the first bomb (no one has documented this).
The Americans and we went just the other way - the weapons are more important, then we will negotiate.
But for weapons is needed weapons-grade plutonium, and we need a lot. It is one thing to theoretically calculate, and another thing to push 10 megatons of plutonium into a bomb.
So - our and the American problem was that we did not know how to create a bomb, but not where to get so much plutonium.
With the Germans was the other way around: they had already produced a large amount of radioactive substance.
Do you know why we so “anxiously” agreed with the Americans/British how to divide the territory of Germany, when it was already clear that its capture was a matter of time?
We looked in what areas and cities where there were German research institutes and reactors.
And on the still German territory, sabotage American and Soviet special groups were operating, competing in the extraction of documents, equipment, the capture of specialists, and most importantly, the already existing plutonium.
Now in the US, data is published that the first two American bombs were created precisely from German plutonium.
And the US went ahead of us.
Still, we suffered much more during the war, and short-sightedly many scientists were incarcerated in 1937, or even shot.
Our nuclear project went in two directions - solve the problems yourself and "cheat".
Surely you know that the structure of the atomic bomb was "leaked" to the Soviets by the Rosenbergs.
But... again.
To make one or two bombs scare it and show that we know how to make them.
But these are single copies, not mass production, to launch a nuclear arms race.
And the mass production of plutonium in large volumes is not about getting it in small quantities in laboratories.
The whole process consists of three parts A) enrichment of natural ore and production of weapons-grade plutonium B) separation of pure weapons-grade plutonium from ore and purification from impurities; and C) charge formation.
In Kyshtym all three plants were built, and they were called with the same spelling.
Plant A (reactors), Plant B (separation) and Plant C (charge formation).
And we built this complex just a few years after the Americans. But even these few years are disadvantage.
And here we have the same dilemma - do we build it ourselves or "look over the fence"?
And it turns out we cheated.
The plutonium separation plant (plant B) was an almost complete copy of the American first such plant, Hanford Site.
And so the identical copy that we created repeated all their technological mistakes and short-sights.
For example, there was a problem with the wastes storage.
Nobody then imagined how far the race would go and what the consequences of all this were.
Moreover, this plant turned out to be not powerful enough.
We have already launched a lot of reactors, the charge was formed well, but the release of plutonium from the ore was like a bottleneck in an hourglass.
Therefore, very quickly we began to think over the construction of the second plant B, and taking into account all the errors and minuses of the first plant and much more powerful one.
At its launch, we would be ahead of the United States in the annual production of radioactive elements.
And they began to build it right there, in Kyshtym, near the first plant B.
Now lets see if for the USA stand point.
There is a cold war and an arms race.
They know the situation with our facilities and everything about the plants.
At least in the reports of that period there is an excellent aerial photo with all soviet nuclear plans.
They also know that Plant B is a copy of their Hanford Site. And they also know that construction is underway, which at the end will strongly push us forward.
What do you think, if they disable the only plant and stop the construction, what would be the result of the cold war?
We will have to start all over again, and this will take years.
The most popular version (including by the Americans) of the catastrophe in Kyshtym is the explosion of a waste storage facility.
Plutonium was already being delivered from there, but still enough radioactive elements remained in these wastes to make everything go to hell.
Both we and the Americans, having twin plants, faced with the problem of storing these wastes, and very much watched each other who will come first with a solution to the problem.
To stabilize these wastes (so as not to explode themselves), certain chemicals were added to them.
Moreover, at first, the effect of these substances was calculated in a laboratory.
There were several options.
I don’t want to go into deep chemistry now.
In short, in a laboratory in the USA, while testing these stabilizers, they suddenly got a big explosion out of the blue.
It turned out that separately two substances are good, but together they get the opposite effect.
We did not have time for experiments, our intelligence reported that a large amount was brought to the Hanford Site from both substances. So did we.
Then it turned out that both were never used in the USA, and we got the Kyshtym disaster.
You may laugh at this scenario, but I didn’t come up with it, it’s described in Los Alamos report for the CIA.
On United States behalf there could have been at least a deliberate misinformation, intentionally leading to the tragedy.
But in fact, it’s not very clear at all, because there seems to be some mentioning of interference with the system for monitoring the stability of the waste.
In conclusion, we got a disaster on the scale of Chernobyl and Fukushima.
The old plant and the construction site of the new plant were completely radioactively contaminated as they were built close.
The construction site was infected even more than the old plant.
The USA could rejoice and open the champagne.
But alas.
They did not take into account the lack for respect of human life in the USSR.
The price of life was zero.
Neither the operation of the old factory nor the construction of a new one stopped their work for a single day.
Inmates and soldiers were brought to clean.
The USA could not foresee and understand this, their intelligence began to wonder "what are the Russians up to".
To be continued
Galina Sazonova
















#1129 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 03 październik 2019 - 20:39



Meeting with M. P. Sharavin
Transcript of the conversation with the representative of the "CENTER for Civil Investigation of the Dyatlov Tragedy" Elder (AK) and the representative of the "Dyatlov Foundation" Y. Kuntsevich (YK) with rescuer M. Sharavin (MSh) 15 Feb 2007
AK: What date were you dropped off at what place?
MSh: On Otorten, on the 23rd at the end of the day.
In the afternoon near Otorten.
AK: Near Otorten, where: how far, how high?
MSh: Right on a slope above the forest, but not far, somewhere 300 meters above the tree line, on a place like that (map, photo-1)
MSh: On a flat ground.
By this time, in my opinion, Sogrin or Akselrod, one of them, had already gone up the mountain and we already had information that there was nobody there, because while we were still in the air, we were flying here because there was still no information about whether they were on the mountain or not.
So when they arrived, and were expecting two more flights, first one group, then the second, and in this period they climbed the mountain and ...
AK: So they landed earlier?
MSh: I think that Sogrin was investigating these spurs.
His group went here. (map, photo-2)
I think they most likely went on Otorten ... Yura (Yudin) told me that Sogrin went here.
They went up here and we had information that ... this means that the first group landed.
AK: Here Akselrod wrote himself…
MSh: Akselrod went there on the mountain.
They didn’t go further with us, if it’s Axelrod, then they went up.
And then they had a different route and they generally didn’t participate in our group with Slobtsov.
In our group were Halizov, Krotov, I have a list…
Added later:
Navig: You were in a group with Halizov and Krotov?
Who else?
MSh: Slobtsov, Krotov and Yuri Koptelov, there were more of us, but I don’t remember everyone now.
I have a record of it.
Everybody from the group is there.
MSh: There were at least 6 people.
Navig: You and Slobtsov were you in one group?
MSh: Yes.
He was the leader of the group.
Y.Koptelov was also in our group.
Navig: And Ivan, the firefighter, was he also with you?
MSh: No.
There were two in our group.
They joined in Ivdel.
This Ivan and another one.
Navig: So Ivan and the fireman are different people?
MSh: Yes.
Navig: You have the addresses of Halizov and Krotov?
MSh: No.
Krotov is no longer alive.
I have an address for Koptelov.
AK: Were you briefed about the search, i.e. given any instructions, in the city or in the helicopter, or on the spot?
MSh: No, there were no instructions in the city.
We just got together in the city... and we gathered for like half a day, i.e. quickly.
We didn't really need much preparation, because we had just returned from a trip and were physically ready and had our equipment with us.
Well, maybe we came back two days earlier, now I don’t remember exactly, but we just got back form a trip.
There was no briefing.
Added later:
Navig: You did not have any instruction, from the prosecutor's office or anybody else?
MSh: No.
Navig: But according to the rules, you should have been given instructions because you could have messed up everything at the scene?
MSh: They followed this case behind the scenes.
We had a suspicion that one of the men who was sent to us in the capacity of a guide, was clearly not performing accordingly.
This is how they tried to influence.
This is why Yuri had the idea that while we found the tent and the first bodies of the 27th, someone visited the site besides us.
For example, the brown blanket that was covering the bodies was no longer there.
We claim that they were covered with a brown blanket, and then it disappeared, it turned out to be in the tent.
It was at cedar and then ended up in a tent.
And when they began to sort things out in the tent and found it there.
Who moved it there?
MSh: In the afternoon of the 23rd we flew out.
So, on the eve of 22, we flew with an An airplane from Sverdlovsk to Ivdel, spent the night there, waited half a day for the helicopter, the weather was bad, on the evening of 23 we flew out.
On the 23rd we spent our first night on Lozva, because in the afternoon we walked a bit, the next day we walked down Lozva and began to cross into the Auspiya valley; it's the 24th.
On the 25th we went skiing.
We did not go down to Auspiya.
They walked along the left bank.
We crossed their ski track and found it, on the evening of this day it was was our third night.
It was already the 25th, so we arrived.
YK: To the cache site (labaz - ed. note)?
MSh: No, not that day.
On this day we settled.
On the 25th we spent the night, on the 26th we went on a radial search.
Went, in my opinion, on 3 routes.
Here we are, with Slobtsov and with the guide, we went up the Auspiya, along the track directly along theirs, went to the pass and 26th found a tent.
The rest of the groups... there were two more groups, they went somewhere…
YK: Who was there from the guides?
MSh: A fireman.
I forgot my last name.
YK: Mansi?
MSh: No there was no Mansi yet.
On the 26th what happened is that on the 26th we found the tent and we quickly returned on our old ski track to our camp and when we arrived, literally a few hours before this, the Mansi group had arrived.
They dragged one of his sick fellows on hides, he got sick on the road, the radio operator came with them, and in my opinion right there and then, in the evening radio report, it was announced that the tent was found.
We discussed our actions for the next day the 27th.
Since it was known that there was nobody in the tent, that they had gone down to the slope to Lozva, we coordinated with Maslennikov, that we would go early in the morning with Yuri Koptelov down Lozva river valley to choose a place for a camp, since the guys went there, it is necessary to look, clearly, in the direction of Lozva and we had to choose a place, but still remained to collect the tent.
We didn’t cross over the pass, we climbed not along the old track, but a little to the right, through height 880.
It remained to the right, but at the same time we went to the right of the remnant (the memorial - ed. note).
If you look here, this pass ... further to the south .... here is the pass, here is the mountain ... from here, it says 880 on these maps.
They say that the altitudes have changed since.
Here it the 880.
Here somewhere is the remnant... we’re probably literally... or maybe, since we got up from there (map), we even like that ...
Because we went down in that direction. when we climbed here began to look down, it became clear that there ... there weren’t such birch trees yet, like now, after 48 years - everything is overgrown with birch trees, but then this cedar stood out very well, it was like some kind of that hillock.
Such a little mound but it stood out very prominently, so we went there right away.
We arrived at the cedar and then found them.
Because there the snow was swept out under the cedar and it was very clear, the undergrowth was small, there was a lot of snow, the bushes were visible and we were skiing down (map), these bushes were not in the way.
AK: Who found them?
Because in one book it says that you and Slobtsov show up later, when the bodies were already found?
MSh: In one book it says that we didn’t find the cedar, but allegedly Brusnitsyn with someone, this can't be true, because it is not something that you forget, we were the first to go together, there was nobody else there, with Yuri Koptelov.
We walked side by side, went down together and literally 10 meters, or 15, before reaching the cedar, we saw something black, because the blanket was on top, it was not covered, it stood out.
We approach and immediately... then we began to observe.
We see traces of the fire, and the fire was on the same side [of the cedar] from which the guys were lying, and some branches were broken, we could see this.
See here is this book... in the dictionary it says: “Cedar is an eternally green tree.
Under a huge cedar growing on the slope of the mountain on February 26” - this is wrong, it was not the 26th, but the 27th,- "Slobtsov discovered two bodies."
Slobtsov was not here on the 26th.
We found the tent with him, this is the day before.
And this happened on the 27th and we were with Yuri Koptelov.
YK: And went to report right away?
MSh: Then we threw our backpacks here and began to climb.
Yurii went along our track to meet the guys to inform them, and I went to the remnant, because the helicopter flew in.
A helicopter brought guides, dog trainers with dogs, so I met them and gave them information.
AK: And the fire, what kind of traces did you see?
MSh: The logs were simply unburnt, mostly branches of such a thickness (shows) broken from the cedar, the traces from where they were broken were clearly visible.
Here are some ends like this. Here it burned ... it’s clear that no one even mended to the fire, otherwise, if someone was watching the fire, he would have have shifted and rushed the logs to burn…
YK: So once they started the fire…
MSh: This means the fire stop burning when there were no more people around.
No one was watching.
Well, there were not many unburnt firewood.
There were not many, maybe ... five like that.
But we immediately noticed that Doroshenko, especially his hands were black up to his elbows, and it’s not just brown, as many have observed there, his face is a little brown in color, as if exposure from a flash of fuel is possible, but he clearly had ... that he was trying to warm them, it was clearly... a fire.
We immediately noted that his hands were frostbitten to such an extent that he did not feel anything, when he was still trying to warm them.
Some impression that the slightly unburnt skin was already black ...
This is (photo-3) at the very spot.
You can see that there were some branches chopped off.
AK: Was there any brushwood?
MSh: We did not see any brushwood.
AK: You did not see any laying around?
MSh: The brushwood could be a little further away and covered with snow, maybe, or we were then not up to a careful study of this whole scene, i.e. we noted that at the first moment everything there was to notice.
Later on one could thing of inaccuracies, but these are the most basic facts.
Added later:
Navig: And what was the thickness of the branches in the fire under the cedar?
MSh: Up to 50 mm
Navig: Were they broken off or coul dyou see cuts on them?
MSh: Broken off, traces of an ax or knife on them were not visible.
Navig: How far from the cedar was the fire?
MSh: The fire was next to the cedar, about 50 cm.
Navig: Was it on top of the snow or was it covered in snow?
MSh: There was wind and the place was swept and everything was blown off.
You could se the logs.
Navig: But the bodies were also near the cedar?
MSh: They were within 2.5 m from the cedar, on the same side where the fire was near the cedar.
They lay.
Navig: From the side of the tent?
MSh: No, on the opposite side, in the direction of the place where they found the rest in the ravine.
And the fire was behind the cedar if you look from the side of the tent.
And this is due to the fact that the wind then blew from the side of the tent and cedar protected from wind.
Navig: And who could cover them with a blanket?
MSh: Now, if we stick to our version, then we believed that Kolevatov, who was still alive, covered them, but Yuri believes that there may be groups that worked there to clean up, if we concider this version and maybe they were covered after they died.
Although there are many perplexing questions because there are injuries incompatible with life just for the guys below.
Navig: А вот про ледоруб, это все-таки был их ледоруб или нет?
MSh: The ice ax was definitely theirs.
Navig: In the tent, quilted jackets were under the blankets or on top?
MSh: The quilted jackets were under the covers, first the skis lay below, then the backpacks, then the quilted jackets, then the blankets.
Navig: Were the blankets spread out or crumpled?
MSh: No, they were spread out.
When we initially made our way in, we removed the snow, of course we did not completely clear it.
AK: And the screen?
What is it?
MSh: Screen?
The window you mean.
We didn't notice it then, it was noted and carefully examined only later.
It is at a sufficient height, not less than 4-5 meters, broken branches and now the ends of the broken branches are visible.
When we were in 2001, we noticed and photographed it.
This is the cleared space from the branches.
To be seen.
That it was directed towards the tent and, most likely, was used in order to see what was going on there.
Window in the cedar
AK: The window is meant.
Then we did not notice it, then it is already noted, later, when we carefully examined it.
But this is at a sufficient height, not less than 4-5 meters, broken branches and now the ends of the broken branches are visible.
When we were in 2001, we noticed and photographed it.
This is the cleared space from the branches.
To be see through.
It was directed towards the tent and, most likely, was used in order to see what was going on there.
MSh: For a fire, no one will climb to such a height to break off branches for a fire, when branches remained lower; the same trunk was two and a half meters bare, that is, it was broken off.
Then, a row of branches.
And already much higher, branches for this window are broken.
I.e. it is obvious that it was used for surveillance.
Nothing else could be seen from there.
It turns out, most likely, I am inclined to the fact that it was one of them who made the observation window.
Someone could have had enough strength.
I don't think it was an outsider, it seems to me - no ...
But who could have remained so strong?
Only Kolevatov, maybe?
YK: But where to get strength in such cold, barefoot, stripped and without gloves...
AK: And after you found the bodies at the cedar, did you go up to the tent?
MSh: At first we climbed in our ski track, and then went to the remnant.
Without reaching the remnant about 30 meters away the helicopter landed.
There is a pass, and the remnant is not at the pass itself, it is somewhat lower, 50 meters towards Auspiya.
There is an elevated place, the helicopter landed at the very transit point, close to the remnant.
When we were meeting someone or taking off ourselves, the helicopter always stopped behind the remnant, as if at a transit point, closer to Lozva than to Auspiya.
Usually this is the most convenient place, the platform is even, and the aircraft needs to land on a even surface.
AK: And what was the state of snow on the slope and above?
YK: Where did the soft snow begin?
MSh: At the remnant the snow was already with a crust.
There wasn't much snow there, we went skiing just as you go along, you push off with poles, there was solid snow, it froze and was swept out there.
And in the direction of the tent we walked through snowy meadows.
That is, there was no loose snow in this whole place.
When we approached the tent, when we saw it and turned, the snow was already dense.
And when we discovered the footprints, they were as if on pillars, that is, as if all the loose snow had been blown out, blown away by the wind.
The soft snow had hardened underfoot and when the wind blew away the loose snow the footprint remained a little higher.
As on platforms.
There were impression.
It is not what happens on firn snow, let’s say that they were embossed.
The snow is blown out so that they remain like pillars, a little higher series of tracks ...
The tracks began about 8 (eight) meters from the tent, but no further. Immediately behind the tent, this is how the wind acts... it blows away the snow behind the barrier, then the snow rises a little ... and as soon as it rises a little, then traces began to be visible.
Both in front and next to the tent, especially from the side of the entrance - everything was blown out there.
On the other hand, from the side opposite the entrance, and from the side of the mountain or the slope - the was no such clearance and the snow went smoothly into the tent - and continues smoothly further down the slope.
There is such an interesting place.
AK: Where was the tent on the slope?
MSh: Is it at a height of 1079? ...
You see, here there is this elevation to the right and the stone ridge is coming.
This place looks, most likely, as such a corridor ...
After all, you have summer photos ...
Somewhere in this part, most likely, you need to look for a place for a tent.
When we took pictures ... you don’t have those photos? ... Yuri brought ...
AK: Here is the ridge...
MSh: Well, this ridge ... well, we found here in this area, we determined a place ...
If you look from the side down, the ridge remained on our left.
There, further down, there was a number of such ridges... and not far from this ridge, well, about 20 meters, somewhere in this part ...
Let's compare the photographs ...
Something in like a recess is formed in this place (photo-4).
It’s like a place fell on the sidelines of such a ...
And when we began to examine the vegetation in the places where it had already grown, it turned out that all these small birches from the side of the slope were torn everywhere.
They all have their bark peeled ...
That is, there at some time, I don’t know when, but the snow was moving ... by the wind?
Added later:
Navig: You talked about ragged birches and cedars.
They grew up near the tent?
MSh: I mean, birch trees peeled were like from avalanches, where snow went down.
They grew up in the place where the tent was.
But then when we found the tent everything was under the snow and there was none of this, but when we flew in the spring, these birches had already melted and we carefully examined them.
From the side of the slope, i.e. from the side of possible avalanches, all these birch trees had their bark peeled off.
Navig: And in the area of the cedar, was there something of the kind?
MSh: No, there wasn't.
AK: Still moving?
MSh: Well, it’s not even entirely possible to be blown away ...
Tattered so intensely, and the direction is the same, from the slope.
But this direction of the prevailing winds is the same ...
They all have bark from the side of the slope stripped, and birches, and small cedars ...
AK: But is the guys walking down the slope?
Down straight to the cedar?
MSh: Yes.
In the direction of the guys.
This is a general slope there and the direction, if you look from the side of the stripped branches, it will just be the direction there ...
You can look in a different way, in another photo ... (photo-5).
This is this elevation and this is elevation - they determined the width of this recess.
And the tent ...
That is, we first found an approximate place where the tent could have been and began to investigate, and it turned out that these were shores, and there was a hollow ...
And of course, if in May it was like this leveled, then when we found a tent, there was much more snow here, because there were no bald patches anywhere, it was covered.
And I didn’t measure, but the snow there, in these places, was not less than a meter or more ...
And therefore the impression that this area did not look at all like that, it was as if elevated.
This place looked elevated and the tent turned out to be to some extent on the transition: slope, then a platform, and then there is a decline again. (draws a map).
But where there is a tent, this platform was not in a valley, not buried in the snow.
The tent was even a little higher.
That is, here, perhaps, it is quite possible that there was some movement of snow, a heap ...
That is, now, when we were looking for this place, I was guided...,
I was just guided by what?
I focused approximately on the direction where we went.
We went with a certain purpose.
We went to the nearest hill, which means a crossroads, to look in the direction of Otorten, because the guide told us that there, they say, there is a lake where there are landslides, the cliff is pretty steep, that the deer graze there, you look from above, and they are like mittens...
That is, we decided to go in the direction of this cliff.
Therefore, we moved there, and when we moved in this direction, we walked like this to the left ... and about 50 meters to the left we found the tent.
It’s like we’re going from here to there, here - and to the left of the slope we found a tent, about 50 meters... we saw the top of the tent (photo-6).
Because only the top was sticking out.
AK: Here is a photo of the tent (photo-7).
What had changed compared with what you saw the first time?
MSh: Well, here, here, after being raked, here...
AK: Was snow piled on top of the tent?
A lot?
MSh: Now it seems to me that this was the entrance ... if it wasn’t the ski again and it was those skis, then there were skis at the entrance.
At the entrance.
And on the opposite side there seemed to be sticks, but there were no skis ...
Most likely this is not the entrance, I think so ... (photo-8).
And the fact that there is a pile of snow on this side - that was it.
The entrance was higher, it was tied to skiing, and only one entrance was visible.
Only one entrance was visible, and it was as it were ...
I think this is this photograph after they worked well here.
Well, first of all, we worked with Slobtsov, trying to dig it up.
We found an ice ax and broke all the snow on top and cut through the skate of the tent ... this is the damage that we partially inflicted on it ... we needed to get to the inside and make sure that nobody was there.
And since it was not just that te tent lay there, unhinged, covered with snow, we couldn't tell if there is somebody inside...
When we found it, here, one end was raised, and covered.
Here you see snow is piled all around, this is due to the fact that the tent was dug up [and the snow was piled up around it]...
AK: And who in the photo is not clear here?
And who took the picture?
MSh: It’s not clear... this is when we took it apart...
There were quite a lot of people...
AK: And there the prosecutor’s filmed anything at all?
Was there an expert photographer?
MSh: I don't think so.
We didn't work on the tent with Ivanov.
He showed up later.
AK: With Korotaev?
MSh: Yes.
Well, when we took it apart, the picture had completely changed.
All the snow was cleared, the tent was dismantled and everything moved to a flooring and began to sort it out ... there was generally a leveled area ... two days passed ... then they worked so hard in this place that no forensic investigators like that this case is not being investigated ...
And who has been there these days?
Many have visited to see what is what...
Now, is they fenced it like this, there wouldn't be a single trace at all...
AK: After you found the tent, almost all the groups were around?
MSh: Probably, during ... if we were sorting it on the 28th till the end of the day, then the first ones started the search, went down, they went clearly from the tent.
The first ones I met were the guides, I showed them the tent and they followed in the footsteps down - and traces could be added and everything that is not there...
From the point of view that it is necessary to obtain information, we didn't see things through back then...
I have to admit that we didn't mark in any way where the tent was...
It was described, Maslennikov described there ... it can only be judged indirectly.
It indicates the height and approximate distance from the top.
It seems to me that this distance is far from accurate ... there it says 300 meters.
But what are 300 meters?
It seems to me much further ... to me it seems that here could be 300 m from the foothill, but not from the top.
YK: Maslennikov's notebook is now in Karelin?
Added later:
Navig: Do you have Maslennikov’s diary?
There is information that it is and is not published.
MSh: No, no.
Maslennikov died, and probably handed it to someone.
Slope of height 1079 in 2001. The red flag marks the place of the tent according to M. Sharavin
MSh: Yuri has some of his notes... at least testimonies or something ... a record, because from there I remember that the height is indicated not so... at intervals, approximate height ...
There was no satellite navigation system, so that this point could be fixed to the nearest meter, and then recorded.
Then it would be possible to find it again.
Now there is this point that we noted, and it can be found.
Nowadays the point we found with the guys was recorded using the satellite system.
That is, it can be found where we have now identified the place.
At the very least, we can compare records with the originals ones: how did we get to this point.
Because then they also evaluated there for a reason, but looked at the map where the horizontal heights are.
I think that's how they defined it.
AK: When the tent was first discovered, what things did you notice when you got inside?
They talk about a windbreaker, a flashlight ... slippers?
MSh: From this point of view, there is one, let’s assume, by the way...
This is what Matveeva describes, she very closely describes how I present the case, except for one thing: she writes that they found a log there.
It was not logged, but a stove filled with firewood.
There was not a single log laying around, but the stove, such a small one there, it was completely clogged with firewood.
That is, they expected to warm up, they simply did not lit it.
No firewood was pulled from the stove...
YK: It says about the time [they had]...
MSh: It was standing near the entrance.
What did we first saw when we approached the tent: a pair of skis that stood upright in the snow at the entrance.
In my opinion, the entrance was even tied ...
Skis stood, an ice ax stuck at the entrance.
They didn’t notice anything else on the ground.
When they began to disassemble the tent, we found a stove, a camera, a flask with alcohol, loin... it somehow seemed to be not in the package, but it scattered...
Well, I don’t remember the items...
Added later:
Navig: About the ice ax, was it their ice ax or not?
MSh: The ice ax was definitely theirs.
MSh: It seems to me that things weren’t lying around like that, especially since they didn’t notice anything near the tent.
At the floor everything was laid so carefully, nothing was turned upside down, they were just preparing for an overnight stay, nothing was amiss.
Skis, quilted jackets lay down there ... backpacks, then quilted jackets ... blankets were spread like this ...
So, what did we find?
We didn’t even make out this far corner, it was so caved in... we looked at this part.
Well, Slobtsov says that we found a flashlight there on the top ...
Most likely, this was the case, but somehow I did not remember this. ...
All that I say is reliable.
We took the camera down with us, a flask ... we drank it immediately that same night when we went back to the camp.
And there was nothing more to say.
Added later:
Navig: And we just came to the blankets.
Were the blankets were woolen or cotton?
MSh: No, cotton.
These blankets were student blankets from the dormitory, they were all cotton.
Navig: Still on the tent, quilted jackets were under blankets or on top?
MSh: The quilted jackets were under the covers, first the skis lay below, then the backpacks, then the quilted jackets, then the blankets.
Navig: Were the blankets spread out or crumpled?
MSh: No, they were spread out.
When we initially cut our way in, we removed the snow, of course we did not completely clear it.
AK: Was there anyone from the prosecutor's office in the searches?
In the groups first probably?
Or did Ivanov come later?
MSh: No, no one from the prosecutor’s office was there. For example, we had two people in the group...
AK: What about other organizations?
MSh: ...One of them - we suspect that he was involved with the organs.
He always walked with a camera on his chest...
AK: And you were not allowed to take pictures?
MSh: ... well, in my opinion, we didn't have cameras.
Most likely, maybe there was no such ban, official. If someone had a camera with them - and took pictures, if they wanted to...
But this one with the camera, one comrade ...
One was saying to be a fireman, but the second, I find it difficult to even say who he was by affiliation.
Such a young relatively ...
The fireman was older, and this relatively young compared to him ... well, of course, he was 35 years old at that time.
If we were 25, then he was not old...
But here is the suspicion that this second comrade was assigned with a specific purpose.
He didn't behave as a guide.
It seems that he did not know the area.
Yes, and first...
YK: Did he have any investigative techniques?
MSh: That's just the point ... for example, we went up, looking for a ski track ... well, I was looking for a ski track, so as not to go astray.
Strayed, found again, walked again ...
And he was behind us on the beaten track and didn’t take any step aside ...
Well, of course, compared to us, we are young, but he did not behave so we could suspect anything obvious.
But the first one had little to do with a "fireman".
How do we know this?
When we came from the pass in the evening, when we found the tent, everyone was shocked, we drank their flask, and someone...
Well, the "fireman" settled down at the entrance to sleep ...
And someone went out at night, he stumbled over a rope, the peg came off, the ridge rope came loose.
The rope burned out, the stovepipe disconnected, and all the smoke went into the tent.
This "firefighter" was the first to rush out, doing nothing but yelled "Fire! Fire!".
This mishap happened right in front of me, I was sleeping under stovepipe, they gave me some mittens, I closed my eyes and tried to connect it in the dark...
And none of the searchers rushed out of the tent, and this "firefighter" was the only one outside.
And then until the end of the night he didn’t even get back inside the tent, and spent the rest of the night sitting by the fire.
I doubt he was a "fireman".
YK: The important question, of course, are the dates...
MSh: Well, then we are with Yuri, these dates, even the first meeting with him, went through and specified.
There is confusion.
Including the fact that on the 27th they found a tent, there is this, I read somewhere, it was wrong ..
Here... this one also says the date ... on the 26th probably.
Well, she writes the 26th.
Not the 26th, but the 27th.
AK: After the cedar, when did they start looking in the stream?
What was the approximate date?
Or was it later, in March, in general?
MSh: So, at the beginning of April one of the groups noticed a spruce branches in the direction where they were found.
They found a spruce branches sticking out of the snow.
But then they didn't follow up on this idea to look in the area where the spruce branches were found in the snow, they moved away and didn't look any further.
There wasn't much that they could do back then - there were no long probes, only short ones, they ordered long probes.
And at the beginning of May the snow thawed, and the branches were discovered again, they seemed to have been broken down, it was then that they began to probe with long probes and, in I think they found Dubinina first.
They felt her with the probe first, then began to dig...
AK: Did you see the den in the creek?
MSh: No.
Because at that time I was...
I was there for the second time at the end of April...
I don’t know, I’m already thinking... no, there could be such a coincidence - maybe they intentionally removed me?
We did not go to the pass for search, because there was rain, there was ice.
We had a day for ourselves.
And it got into my head somewhere after lunch to go out to ski.
I rose a little higher than the forest level, did not reach the pass and went down, well, I skied down there.
Skiing was good, it was exceptionally.
I came to the tent, I said: "Guys, let's go skiing?"
Well, a few people liked the idea.
We climbed a little higher.
I'm the first, of course, on a ready-made ski track.
It spreads much over the ready-made ski track... and it’s so blown away... and there’s some kind of drain, a couloir in one place and trees seem to be on both sides, not so close, but I could no longer control the skis, they [the trees] merged into a single wall...
But I felt that trees are coming in front of me, then I began to fall, so I leaned back from the skis, but when I fell back, I hit the snow with my rear, it lifted me up in the air, turned me in the air and turned my head forward into a birch, stuck into a tree like this across the forehead... broke two teeth, there was a slight concussion.
And without waiting for our shift to end, I was taken from there by helicopter to Ivdel, and then I was lying with a concussion for 21 days in the hospital.
After that we were replaced and the next group that found them in the stream.
YK: Was Ortyukov there all the time?
MSh: Yes.
He was always there.
I think that it is not known what would have ended if I hadn’t crashed there and started looking further, because I don’t even remember going back to the cedar, examining the place.
We could have carefully examine the scene and deduce in which direction to look for them.
Because when we arrived in 2001 and started from the cedar, I immediately began to notice old broken branches, it is clear that they are black ... and they were not covered in snow ...
But then, of course, it was May, the snow has already melted a little, and in these places I was approximately in the direction in which I assumed that they were according to the descriptions, because I talked to the guys that found them.
They told me...
So, roughly went in this direction, and began to notice these things here.
We quickly went out onto the sidelines, took photographs, compared with those old photographs that were and identified the place where the den could be.
Well, according to the first descriptions of Yuri, he had such an assumption that it’s not on this sidelines, which flows into the tributary of Lozva, but in the inflow itself.
The prevailing assumption was that the den was found in the tributary itself, and this contradicted with what I have reserached since then.
Indeed, we have found this stream, which is not at all the main tributary, and there are several ravines there, this is from the side of height 880, from the side of this spur (map).
And, most importantly, they go - one... then you climb, you pass it, a short distance - and the cedar, and beyond the cedar the next one is just the same parallel stream...
These marks are still there.
If you look for them in the summer, you can see them, broken branches are visible and they were broken long time ago.
It was good to see this den, perhaps something is still left of it.
One question remains unclear to the end: there are seven or eight large branches, as I imagine, at least such thickness - they could not be cut with a knife, you know?
So they chopped them with an ax, but they didn’t have an ax.
Broke it?
Yes, too, they could not break ...
With what?
Whether they did it or not a re-enactment of building the den could help - this issue could be investigated now, because, probably, the traces of this den have not decayed during this time, something could have remained.
AK: And who found them?
MSh: I don’t know at the moment.
I know that Suvorov was in this search.
You need to read carefully now, there is a record.
Yuri has these notes who was there.
Of course, not a single person found them there, because it was only a hunch that came to one, and there they were digging with the whole group purposefully.
They dug all day, if not more.
They dug up, first got to the bottom of one, and then ... because the 5-meter layer of snow, it is already frozen all, it needs to be excavated, which is not so simple.
AK: Did you talk to any of them?
MSh: No, I didn’t talk to anyone, at least not then.
This is what happened: I was in the hospital then, they flew in and found them during this period, and I was somehow torn off somehow from such information.
I was not even at the funeral.
AK: Now it’s not possible to find out, but Matveeva seems to have written that they got them before the prosecutor’s arrival?
MSh: No, in my opinion they didn’t go there, they were waiting.
They waited for two days and were inquiring, judging by the radiograms ...
So, in my opinion, they didn’t go there, maybe just one, or something...
Yes, one, it seems...
YK: Well, this question is really for those who were there.
If Suvorov, it will be necessary to contact him.
MSh: Yes, he will surely have some clearer memories, because he himself was present there.
Moreover, he got sick there ... well, not right away, after that he got sick.
He had a suspicion that due to contaminated water, they linked his disease with the environment...
YK: This is interesting...
MSh: Maybe from this point of view he will shed light.
Moreover, there is a suspicion that at that moment when the streams flowed, it began to melt and started to run - it really flowed down from all the heights through this tributary, it was going in that direction.
AK: Somewhere was said that you, Slobtsov and Brusnitsyn were called upon arrival at the prosecutor's office?
MSh: Well, they didn’t call me in particular, but maybe they were, I don’t know how and why exactly, probably because I was not alone, but with Slobtsov, and he seemed to be the leader of the group, therefore most likely...
Well, I had a conversation with the prosecutor only at the moment when they examined the tent.
When things were sorted out, he said such a phrase, as if indirectly: "You do not talk around about all this.
But when we find out all the circumstances, we will gather and tell you ..."
Although none of that happened.
I clearly remember this.
AK: Korotaev said this?
MSh: Yes.
AK: You didn't sign any non-disclosure papers?
MSh: No.
There, in fact, there is nothing with my signature.
I don’t know how it happened.
YK: They are not considered secret....
AK: And all sorts of (procedures) during your trip?
There, registration in Vizhay?
MSh: Didn't happen.
We were in Vizhay once, I made a helicopter landing for some purpose ...
Nobody came to us.
AK: It says here that Maslennikov signed a non-disclosure?
MSh: And then, we were there for not so long.
There’s nothing to talk about before the findings.
And after we were there for three days and we were replaced, taken out, the whole group was replaced, [the group] which found the tent and the cedar.
AK: And the guys on the slope, that were supposedly going to the tent, when [were they found], in what sequence?
Is this after the cedar?
MSh: It wasn't us who found them.
First [was found] Kolmogorova, she was found, I think, by a trainer with a dog.
AK: Those closest to the tent.
Did they go from the tent?
Added later:
Navig: You probably made a mistake, in the conversation when you answer the question about the direction of their movement to the tent or from the tent?
You say that they came from the tent.
MSh: No, I did not say that they were going to the tent, they were found on the straight line that connected the tent to the cedar, but the bodies were found in the position as if they were going to the tent.
MSh: From the tent.
The next day, Dyatlov was found.
Mansi found him.
They follow their own omens.
Then a few days later, Slobodin, two days, or something there is a break, they didn't find him right away.
Kolmogorova and Dyatlov were found most likely on the 27th same day they arrived 27th and they found them.
On the 29th they were taken to the pass.
They were four all together.
For transportation.
We didn't carry them, others did, and no one flew with the bodies when they were taken away to Ivdel.
We were also taken out around the same time, a little later.
But I remember nobody flying with them.
YK: What is this fact, that the pilots refused to fly the bodies?
MSh: I haven't heard this.
They were afraid of radiation, I think.
AK: They were afraid to carry or fly them?
MSh: No, they were not afraid to fly.
They flew constantly, serving us, flew to the pass.
But they had different information.
That which was completely unknown to us.
They talked there among themselves, and they saw from above.
They had information probably.
But they were also warned, so we did not hear anything from them.
But I think that they were definitely afraid of radiation, infection, probably, something like this.
AK: When you found the tent and made your way inside, you took off your skis, didn’t go skiing?
MSh: Well, yes, we took them off somewhere.
AK: The snow was trampled there?
MSh: We found no extraneous traces there, of course.
Because the wind was constantly blowing...
AK: You walked on the firn, did not fail?
MSh: Of course on the firn?
Of course did not fail.
But the only thing is, who saw the footprint in the boot?
Could it be our trace?
I don't think so, because I remember from that moment that one fooprint was in a boot.
I.e. it was recorded that [the footrpints] were barefoot and in felt boots [valenki] but one footprint was in a boot.
The tracks were clearly visible.
Just another thing, was there one boot or two?
I think that nobody had two boots on their feet.
AK: One more question, was ther under the two bodies at the cedar reindeer hide or not?
MSh: Well, of course, I can’t confirm or deny.
The hide could’ve been under the snow, we couldn't been able to see if it was there.
YK: So you did not dig, did not move [anything]?
MSh: Well, it could only be under the snow.
I can explain this by the fact that the place is very noticeable, if the Mansi visit this area, they are also hunters, they hunt, if they didn't kill [game], then certainly they could come here.
This is such a noticeable place under the cedar, it isn't by chnace that we notice it from above and came right there, because the place was very noticeable.
The cedar stood out very strongly.
The site was fairly even there, the tent could be put up.
I think that in the same way it could attract hunters.
This hide could be...
AK: Was this Mansi lair?
MSh: Yes, they actually leave kindling in certain places.
Under the same remnant, when we arrived in 2001 and began to look around this rock and look carefully, we found a kindling especially for a fire there, i.e. they leave things up to the point that they leave products somewhere stash for a rainy days.
They follow their serifs, follow their signs, and their path is not random, they follow one track.
If they go in the direction of Lozva, then they can go down, maybe through this place.
And before it (hide - NAVIG) was under the snow, because they really didn’t lie on the bare ground, they lay on the snow, were covered with a blanket, they lay on the snow, and bare ground could have a little bit of this ground then it’s only the trunk itself at the cedar, where there was the fire.
And the fact that near the cedar it seemed to be blown out by the wind, this terrain is higher.
Now this will not happen anymore, because the birch tree has grown in a big circle and then there was only a bush around, there were no birch trees.
AK: Another question, what did the cache site [labaz] look like?
MSh: I didn’t see the cache site because others found it... maybe there were traces of the ski track, because it was below the forest tree line.
AK: So you came on the trail of the group after the cache site?
MSh: No, well, if so, we left their track before they reached the place where they built the cache site.
So they followed the route in the upper reaches of Auspiya, we crossed it and found a ski track.
Then they went from here, we lost the ski track, but judging by the records, they seemed to have climbed the pass at first, the weather was very bad, they didn’t continue to move on and returned to Auspiya, and they spent the night there.
There they made a cache site. But we lost their track before reaching the border of the forest.
This was much earlier ... the track was gone.
In the forest, while the pine tree was large, and the spruce, you could still find it there, although it also quite blown over, it was so hard to advance, although it poured snow, but the groove was there, when you go down with the skis you fall less.
In some places it was hard to see hence we fall so much.
In some places where the wind was not quite so strong we could see some of the track, in another place we couldn’t find it at all.
So we made our way, we maintained the general direction.
AK: Your main base camp, where you spent the night and where leave from [every morning], was it far from the cedar and...?
MSh: It was in a different valley down Auspiya, probably a couple of kilometers short of .. but if you take this line to the pass (map), somewhere 2-3 km, but not so far (map), because, when we skied back down, it seemed to us that we ... left behind the so-called guide, fireman, at the top and rushed down, it was already dark and flew back this distance in an instant...
AK: This is from the tent?
MSh: Yes.
When we were going back to our friends...
AK: And this camp it remained there?
MSh: No, they moved it, just set up a camp in the valley of Auspiya, opposite the pass.
Down there... well, probably 1.5 km is even less like 750 meters.
There 350-400 meters go along a bare spot, and then the bushes begin, then more.
The camp was where the trees were enough.
AK: And when the Mansi arrived, did they put their own tent [chum]?
MSh: They didn’t make a tent [chum].
They sleep in their hides.
YK: Right on the snow you in hides.
MSh: They do not take off their malitsa coats, and cover themselves with hides on top. Breathe ...
Well, they have boilers, there are kettles.
AK: And what was the weather at that time?
MSh: The weather was normal.
Down there you don't feel the wind.
When you go up to the pass there is wind.
But the day was nice clear sunny.
By evening, the snow began.
And the next day, when we found them under the cedar, there was no wind.
But there were cases when we flew from there, there were several cases that we were waiting for the helicopter, it couldn't fly.
Then it appears, it flies from the valley below, in the valley flies above the forest, then it rises along the tops of trees, creeps literally 20-30 meters from the ground, because it is cloudy from above, no visibility.
Flies to the pass, lands down.
We make our way with a pair of skis to the helicopter - it’s so blowing that it’s impossible to drag two skis, such a wind.
Then he rises and takes off ... and back over the trees, flies away.
They were looking for a place along the river, along Auspiya ... military pilots served us...
AK: And when were you replaced and sent to Yekaterinburg, what date?
MSh: In my opinion, on March 4th we flew away from the first search.
We have proof somewhere.
You can clarify later.
They simply removed us, but there were a lot of people, trainers with dogs, Mansi remained.
They, too, had not yet left.
And another group of our hikers arrived.
They were sent to different places.
We were sent to the valleys of Lozva and Auspiya, and as soon as we found the tent, they began to take them off their routes and bring them where we were, so there were a lot of people there.
AK: According to Slobtsov, the tent had a wall of snow?
MSh: No, there was none of this.
AK: And the sheet that hung at the entrance?
Could you see it?
MSh: Yes there was, it looks like there was.
Maybe that's why they didn't try to go out through the entrance.
On one side of the entrance there was a stove, there was something else they had there.
Then it [the sheet] was hung up and it was necessary to leave the tent very quickly.
I have such an opinion, to the question why they left the tent so urgently, there can be only one answer: life threatening factors, most likely poisoning.
They could not breathe.
If there was a movement of snow, they would not have run like that.
At night they don’t see how much snow is moving, but the slide stopped.
The tent was not demolished.
After all, it didn’t grind everyone head over heels with the tent.
I think that these were factors related to the unknown and the inability to continue to be here.
Couldn't breathe!
And the poisoning is such that they felt it.
That's why they ran.
AK: And there couldn’t be snow second slide of snow?
MSh: No, there could be only one movement.
They had no such danger as an avalanche on their heads.
YK: So it was something more serious?
MSh: It could be a light with strong sound.
This could make them jump out, leave the tent.
The guys who were at about the same time south in the hut in the forest, the officer on duty saw an approaching glowing sphere, Karelin, in my opinion, his group was much south, they immediately jumped out, slept already, in socks in everything, when he shouted, they flew out instantly to outside to see what it is?
The rocket moved and passed over them, but they were in the forest, in the hut.
No affecting factors on them other than visually...
And there it was above the level of the forest, and then this glowing sphere could have moved from the south.
And from the south we have a height.
Because of the height, a kind of glow rises there, but nothing is visible, the sky just lit, and then suddenly is above them already.
Flash and explosion.
And then just rocket fuel.
They have traces of obvious poisoning for everyone.
They all had nasopharynx filled with foam, these are clear signs of poisoning.
YK: In addition, our UPI specialists assumed that there could be neutron radiation, i.e. neutron weapon testing is basically the same factors.
Then we must assume that they were all already taken out of the tent.
Cut and taken out.
Here Korotaev even says that it is cut from the inside.
MSh: The fact that [the tent] was cut from inside we could see even before the [oficial] examination, while taking the tent apart.
YK: You take a knife stick and pull towards you...
MSh: Outside, it would have been thrust once and dragged, and there were several attempts, several cuts from the inside, such weak punctures in the tent fabric were observed and then only a cut.
We found this when examining the section still in place, and then the examination confirmed this.
This this is not a gap, so it goes obliquely of the fibers, and the gap is either vertically or horizontally, where it is weaker there.
We cut down part of the tent with an ice ax, i.e. we cut from the top through the bottom.
We did damage, you could say it was necessary .. we had to find out if there was somebody inside, but I think that it could be done differently, it wasn't necessary to cut the tent.
We could remove the snow.
By the way this was done before the footprints were found.
After we cut down the tent, they began to inspect and saw the tracks of footprints.
AK: And you got into the tent through your hole or?
MSh: Yes, through your own, not through the entrance.
We didn't even try to go through the entrance.
YK: There [the entrance], all the more, was covered with a sheet.
MSh: Maybe we would have behaved differently if the ice ax was not perched there at the entrance, the tent was encapsulated with firn snow, we saw the ax, we needed to get inside the tent, of course, we grabbed an ice ax and started chopping.
We did not have an ax or even a knife.
Because we carried nothing but dry rations.
YK: So on the surface [of the tent] that is drawn there in the case, part of it are your holes?
MSh: Yes of course.
There are two slots obliquely and down, these holes were made with a knife, but on the ridge of the tent, in the center, for example, there is another big hole - we cut it.
There, there’s still some sort of lost flap, this is what inflicted...
AK: There was no snow inside the tent?
MSh: Yes, there was no snow.
AK: Despite the holes and the wind?
MSh: The cut was on the leeward side, and so it fell, as it were, on the holes...
End of recording
Added later:
MSh: …They arrived as soon as we found...
They opened the case officially on February 28th.
But in fact, we know that the case was opened on February 4, i.e. three days after their death.
Navig: Where did you get this information?
MSh: When the case was reviewed in the archive by Y. Yudin, there was a note on the very cover that the case was opened on February 4.
The case was first initiated at the moment when they discovered the tent, they still found the tent first, those people who were covering there, who were watching the launch of the rockets. In fact, their death was discovered earlier, and the case was opened on February 4.
Navig: And Y. Yudin saw this on the cover?
MSh: He clearly saw this inscription, he also took a copy from the file of the case.
So we have copy of it. So there is a second case, so follows from these documents ... the pages are removed from this case, there are no histological analysis results, and Yuri gave samples.
These materials were classified , because there is a reference in the archive where they are stored.
Store an open case in one place, and store the package and parts of this case in secret proceedings.
Resolution of the prosecutor Klimov, or something.
Navig: Do you have a photo of the tributary of Lozva where they were found?
MSh: I do not have this photo.
Yudin has it, that's for sure.
We compared this view in 2001 with the one when it was photographed at the time of the search for photographs and, guided by these photographs, we looked for a place and then we photographed ourselves.
So Yudin has photographs both old and from 2001.
MSh: About Dyatlov, Yudin says that post-mortem spots do not coincide with the position of the body.
He thinks the corpse was turned.
Navig: Were there any restrictions where to look during the search, because Akselrod in the TAU film says that they were not allowed to go where they would like to go?
MSh: No, the fact is that we were the very first and there was no one at all.
Subsequently, there could have influenced them.
Akselrod was probably right.
But with us this was not the case.
We then received instruction from our own, i.e. our only binding was the route they were supposed to follow, we were looking for their real ski track along this route.
Then we found them and went to the pass.
Answers of M.P. Sharavin over the phone to Interent-Center for Dyatlov Tragedy 08 Nov 2007
Navig: Mihail Petrovich?
I’m calling about Dyatlov case.
We have a number of questions for you in connection with an article by Zinoviev E. He writes that you (your search group), when you went down to the cedar, examined the traces of Dyatlov group left during their descent from the tent to the cedar and traces were found and from the tent and near the cedar?
MSh: Yes.
Navig: And how many tracks were there?
The same 9 or not?
And at what distance from the cedar?
MSh: It was impossible to count there near the cedar, place was swept by the wind...
Something was near the cedar itself.
The first tracks we found from the tent in the distance, but at the first moment we did not explore the area.
We see the tracks went down, maybe we could trace (them) within 100 meters of the tent.
But then when they began to find them, 800 meters down, there were already no tracks.
They found them [the bodies] by other signs.
Navig: The question is that if the cedar had traces of the Dyatlov group, then they all came down to it.
MSh: There the number of tracks could not be counted.
At that time, the cedar was not in the forest as it is now, and it was as if on a hillock, and there snow was swept to the ground near it, there were traces in a figurative sense there was a fire, broken branches and all that, but no traces in the snow.
Navig: So there were no tracks in the snow?
MSh: No.
Navig: Thanks for the answers.
Transcript of the conversation of "Center for Civil Investigation of the Dyatlov Tragedy" (Navig) with rescuer M. Sharavin (MSh) 16 Jan 2007
Navig: Mihail Petrovich, hi!
We are discussing the location of the cedar and stream, which turns out to be different in different sources.
Can you tell us exactly how everything was connected there?
MSh: Yes of course.
Do you have a map with all the streams?
Navig: Yes there is a map with 500 marking.
There are 4 tributaries of Lozva, two small streams flow into the 4 tributaries.
MSh: If we look from the side of height 1079 from the side of the tent, towards Lozva, then we see this 4 tributary.
It originates to the left of this mountain.
Then it is at the border of the forest, now a little lower, turns left.
Navig: This is height 905, it goes around the mountain.
MSh: In old maps is marked 880.
So it turns away at the level of this height 880 to the left, and goes into the forest.
Here where it turns away...
Navig: Two small tributaries.
MSh: Yes, on the right side, the first and second.
So I think the cedar stood between these two tributaries.
Navig: Is it far to the main 4 tributary?
MSh: Well, probably 100 meters, not far.
Because when we found the cedar, we did not go down to the main tributary.
We went down into the first ravine, and there is a platform.
Navig: Ravine of the streams?
MSh: Yes, the ravine of streams, well then they were covered with snow, but we flew in 2001 and all this was confirmed.
Then this platform was as if flat.
Now it is overgrown with birch trees.
Navig: And the cedar stands there...
MSh: Yes, he stood out then.
Navig: And were there other cedars around?
MSh: Now there are similar cedars around and can be confused.
Navig: Here are pictures of the 2008 expedition.
There are two cedars visible one straight and another inclined.
MSh: But if you come close to them, you can distinguish them.
On that cedar under which the bodies lay, branches are broken - it was the case then and still to this day...
Navig: Is it inclined or straight?
Where the bodies were...
MSh: Straight.
Well, these boughs they were then visible.
And in 2001, near it were visible old stumps from then broken off fir trees.
They were visible that it was impossible to confuse.
Navig: And which direction was the den?
MSh: If you draw a perpendicular from the cedar to the line of the stream, then at the intersection of the second stream there was the den.
There are no more than 100 meters, according to records like 75 meters.
Navig: I.e. in the second creek?
MSh: Yes in the second.
And according to the documents it was completely impossible to determine where and what.
I determined this place by three criteria: 1. According to the descriptions that the guys told me when they found it.
How did they find it?
They went from this cedar further to the opposite side of the tent, and where the branches were sticking out of the snow, they started digging and found the den.
Then the photo was of the place where the den was up the stream.
And we compared this photo with the area.
And the third, in the direction of the second ravine from the cedar, I found stumps there and the direction was taken along them.
But when we were there in 2001, the ravine was covered with snow and we could not find the den.
But in summer it can be found, i.e. rotting for 50 years still something must have remained.
Navig: Yes...
MSh: And then, if you look carefully, you can find the stumps from which the flooring was cut...
Navig: Then Yuri Koptelov was right that there were ravines and they had to climb up on the skis to the cedar.
And what did Dyatlov group do - scramble?
MSh: He's right ... well, of course, we climbed.
We went down with him, then climbed a little, because it was clean enough under the cedar, but there was a little undergrowth and snow was swept under the cedar and this area stood out...
Navig: Koptelov then says that they were lying heads to each other, but in the photo they are lying next to each other.
It seems that in this case they were dragged from the cedar.
MSh: It seems to me that the bodies were next to each other...
Navig: 2 meters from the cedar. 
Behind the cedar in the direction to the tent.
MSh: Yes, it was.
They themselves did not lie down so much that they were laid.
Navig: Could Koptelov seen them before you or later?
Have you been together?
MSh: No.
We went down together, and we found them at the cedar.
He could have been there the next day; to show them to someone.
But I was upset enough and did not want to go down again...
Navig: Well, thank you Mihail Petrovich for the information...
The end.
© "INTERNET-CENTER for Dyatlov Tragedy"

















#1130 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 14 październik 2019 - 22:21

New heated discussion about Prosecutor's office new investigation.

Evgeniy Chernousov – lawyer
Yuri Kuntsevich – chairman of Dyatlov Foundation
Tatyana Perminova – Igor Dyatlov’s sister


Dyatlov case is controversial every step of the way.


They are referring to the exhumation of the remains of Semyon Zolotaryov at Ivanovskoe Cemetery in Yekaterinburg April 12, 2018



The concern is that if exhumations are done before a new criminal case is opened the results might be inadmissible in court due to statute of limitation.


Only the Prosecutor's office can assign expertise at this point.


The exhumation of Zolotaryov was initiated by periodical Komsomolskaya Pravda.


Here is a comment from Natalya Varsegova, the KP journalist present at the exhumation: "The legality of our exhumation of the grave of Semyon Zolotaryov was verified and confirmed by the Prosecutor's office of the Sverdlovsk region.


We conducted this procedure with full compliance with all requirements in the presence of a forensic expert, filming the entire process.


Yuri Kuntsevich is well aware of this."


This press conference seems to be a PR stunt by Chernousov to attract some attention to the case while we are waiting on Prosecutor's office official statement expected February 2020.





















#1131 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 27 październik 2019 - 21:36



Manpupuner plateau is 44 km North from Otorten (appr. 57 km from Dyatlov Pass).


One pillar, 34 meters high, stands somewhat apart from the others.


It resembles an inverted bottle.


Six others lie at the edge of the cliff.


The pillars are said to resemble the figures of a huge man.


Manpupuner formations were once considered sacred by the local Mansi people, and climbing them was regarded as a sin.


The pillars are called the "Seven Giants" or "Seven Strong Men".


According to a local legend, the stone pillars were once an entourage of Samoyeds giants walking through the mountains to Siberia in order to destroy the Mansi people.


However, the men were confronted by a shaman with the white face, called Yallingner, who turned all the warriors into stones.


Yallingner himself was turned into a stone, and since then, the seven formations have been standing in the area, with one facing the other six.



















#1132 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 27 październik 2019 - 21:39

Mansi (English subtitles)



Interview with Mansi indigenous people of the Northern Urals about what do they believe killed Dyatlov group.

#1133 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 27 październik 2019 - 21:39

Trip to a Mansi village



The Mansi are a Finno-Ugric ethnic and linguistic group of tribes living in the Northern Ural Mountains.


They are an endangered indigenous group.


About 7 kilometers north of Ushma lies a smaller and more remote settlement named "Yurta Anyamov".


This is where Anyamov clan lives.


Today the tiny population survives by hunting and making cultural artifacts that are sold in town.


During Soviet times, the Mansi were encouraged to abandon their traditions and language and to assimilate.


Settlements were built as an attempt to discourage the people from their nomadic ways and so that they could benefit from the communist system.


However, the dominant ethnic groups in the region did not accept the Mansi as equals.


Decades of marginalization and social degradation followed.


Today there are about 11,400 Mansi in Russia.


Only about 150 live in the Sverdlovsk region.

#1134 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 27 październik 2019 - 21:39

Mansi music



Maria Yudina plays vargan (aka tumran), jew's harp

#1135 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 29 październik 2019 - 23:06

These are Mansi from Vizhay area.


Most of their names are Anyamov and Bahtiyarov, since the whole clan carries the the same family name.


These photos are from Lidya Androsova's collection "My friends – the Mansi".


I can publish 50-70 photos per day since (of 1400) and star one photo per post, and tell you something about it.


If you are interested in the background of any of the photos, please like them.


If I see a like for a photo with no information I will try to give you what I know.






















#1136 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 29 październik 2019 - 23:09

I went to Dyatlov Pass with the sweetest guy in the universe - I present you Mike Libecki.


It is not just where he goes but what he thinks and sees.


The highest class explorer.






















#1137 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 29 październik 2019 - 23:12



Clasified order Mansi to be questioned


Yuri Nikolaevich Ahmin
Deputy Prosecutor of the Sverdlovsk Region for Special Cases Yuri Nikolaevich Ahmin gives a secret assignment to the Chief of Ivdel Department of Internal Affairs Militia Major Bizyaev, to carry out investigative measures regarding the Mansi who could have witnessed the incident at Mount Otorten.
In one of his interviews, Korotaev spoke about Mansi being maltreated.
But, apart from his stories, this is not corroborated by anything.
According to Korotaev who recollects years later, that acting on this order, the police detain several people and leave them in the cold, coercing testimonies about what they could have seen or know about the incident, in fact, the police intimidate them.
After a while, making sure that the Mansi don't know anything about the incident, they are released.
Case files vol.2 sheet 12



In addition to the existing assignments in the case of the death of Dyatlov group of hikers, please do the following:
  1. Chairman of the Burmantovo village council, Makrushin, spreads a rumor that allegedly Mansi Bahtiyarov Pavel Grigoryevich saw how tourists fell from the mountain and told other Mansi about it 17/II-59 In this regard, it is necessary: a). verify the information; B). find out where does citizen P. G. Bahtiyarov live at the moment; c). find out where was Bakhtiyarov at the time of death of the hikers.
  2. To collaborate that the hikers where attacked by Mansi with religious motives is necessary: a). Find out whose camp did the hikers visit and did Mansi known about it. B). Did Mansi know that teh hikers where headed towards Mt Otorten. c). Is Mount Otorten and its surroundings a sacret for Mansi? (i.e. "prayer" place). d). Find out which of the Mansi men hunted in the valley of the Auspiya river and in the region of the fourth tributary of Lozva river at the time of death of the hikers. e). Find out who was the hunter who left the ski track that the hikers followed. There is an assumption that this is Anyamov.


Make the results of this operational work known to the the prosecutor comrade Tempalov, who is investigating the case.
Topics of interrogations per month
This is a more accurate relationship what are the interrogations about in the months after the tragedy.
These graphs reflect the line of investigations and the increased interest in particular topic or theory.
As we can see, in May, the investigation had already officially gone in the direction of the fire balls.
The investigation is practically not interested in anything else.
“It amuses me that according to the interrogations, the official interest of the investigation to clarify the route begins only after March 10th and its surge falls in April.
Just on time, in my opinion, in order to find a group that has long been found.” - Dr. Galina Sazonova


















#1138 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 29 październik 2019 - 23:21

"In a country of mysterious signs"
This is an overview of the testimonies of Mansi.
They are contradictory to each other, and don't add up.
The impression is that there are big gaps in between, and then something else is said, not bearing out previous testimony.
Let go over the testimonies of Mansi in 1959.
Aleksey Alekseevich Anyamov
Anyamovs clan
Aleksander Prokopyevich
Aleksey Alekseevich (41) father of Andrey Alekseevich
Andrey Alekseevich (21) son of Aleksey Alekseevich
Andrey Alekseevich (58) brother to Aleksey Alekseevich - Маr 23, 1959 (Case files 230-231)
Konstantin Tseskin
Nikolay Pavlovich (23) - Apr 2, 1959 (Case files 261-262)
All the answers start with Answering the questions at hand, but we never see these questions.
Of course judging by the answer one could guess the questions.
Nikolay Pavlovich Anyamov - Apr 2, 1959 (Case files 261-262)
"There are no other people in these areas.
There are no wild tribes in our region.
And Mansi did not meet anyone.
If they had we would have known.
We learned that hikers were missing after the 20th of February 1959."

What other people were they asked about?
Wild tribes?
Thе investigator had some preconception about other indigenous people in the area.
Andrey Aleekseevich Anyamov - Маr 23, 1959 (Case files 230-231)
"I personally never saw in the area another group of five people who are allegedly afraid of Mansi and who did not stay in Ivdel, I haven't heard such from other Mansi either."

The question must have been: "Have you seen a group of five people, strangers, who d not live in Ivdel, and only passed through the area?"

And what is up with "allegedly afraid of Mansi"?
Why should these rouges be afraid of Mansi?
These means according to the investigators unknown source these vagabonds must have previous confrontations with Mansi?
Where does this information come from?
Mansi were hunters, when away form their yurts they carry their guns.
These strangers are supposedly afraid of the Mansi because they do not have weapons, there is no other reason.
Mansi had to register their weapons in Ivdel.
Any other weapons would have been illegal, and the punishment was severe.

What is interesting here is not the answer but where did the question come from.
Bahtiyarovs clan
Bahtiyarov were first to be questioned because Nikolay Pavlovich had said that at end of January a group of hikers (8 people, including one or two women) stayed overnight at his brother Petr Bakhtiyarov’s Yurt.
Yurt Petr Yakimovich Bakhtiyarov yourt, 1954.
The yurt stood on the left bank of the Vizhay River, Petr lived there with his wife Nina Vladimirovna.
Photos are from hikers trek category III of difficulty in the Northern Urals.
Route: Moscow-Sverdlovsk-Vizhay-101-100-Yurts in Anchug-mine-Vels river-Vels river-Moscow.
In the Case files are questioned mentioned three members of the Bakhtiyarov family:

Nikita Vladimirovich (30) Case files 82-83, he has sister Nina
Nikolay Yakimovich (29) Case files 84-85
Prokopiy Savelyevich (17) Case files 86-87
Pavel Vasilievich (60) Case files 223
Sergey Savelyevich (21) Case files 224, Sergey and Prokopiy are brothers
Petr Yakimovich (34) Case files 225-226, Nikolay and Petr are brothers
Vladimir Aleksandrovich Krasnobaev is Chief of preparatory work in 8th forestry district, lives in Ivdel region.
He flew on the Feb 26 to Bahtiyarov yurt to question Mansi if they have seen Dyatlov group.
In his testimony on Mar 7, 1959 (Case files 54-55) he mentions the following additional Mansi: Timofey, Alexander, Kiril and Sonya
They are questioned about different matter - prayer stones, shrines and sacred places

Nikita Vladimirovich Bahtiyarov - Mar 10, 1959 (Case files 82-83)
"I heard that they suspect that Mansi scared the hikers and they died.
I don't believe this to be true.
There is not a single case where Mansi attacked Russians, there is no reason for this.
Mansi payer mountain prayer is located near the Bahtiyarovs yurts 30 km in the upper Vizhay river.
On this mountain no one is forbidden to go Russian men and women, same as the Mansi.
This mountain has never been guarded.
There aren't any valuable things there.
How it was before I don't know.
The prayer stones have never been moved, or rather they can not be moved and Mansi go to this mountain, but such religious Mansi are not that many.
There aren't any other sacred Mansi places."

Distance from upper Vizhay river to Lozva and Auspiya upper sources is approximately 50 km.
The notion is conflict between Mansi and Russians in general, not even specifying passing by cross-country skiers.

Nikolay Yakimovich Bahtiyarov - Mar 10, 1959 (Case files 84-85)
"Yesterday, i.e. March 9, 1959 Mansi Nikita Bahtiyarov and I were at the store by the river Orasu Pru and one drunk that I did not know came up to us and said: "hikers are missing probably Mansi killed them".
We told him that's doubtfully the case, since Mansi have never killed anyone and they don't have a reason to kill hikers."

Kurikov clan
Stepan Nikolaevich Kurikov
Kurikov Stepan Nikolaevich - Mansi shaman, leader of a rescue group 23-Feb-1959
Kurikov Grigoriy Nikolaevich - Mansi, deputy of the Ivdel City Council, interpreter in the interrogations, Stepan's brother (Case files 232)

Artemiy Vladimirovich Gorbushin - Mar 20, 1959 (Case files 228-229)
Officer in charge of Ivdel City Police Department, testified what Grigoriy Nikolaevich Kurikov had said about the Ostyaks: "At the beginning of March 1959 I was in the police station and during this time there was a conversation that the hikers were killed.
In the duty room sat one Mansi, I do not know his name, but they said that it was Kurikov, but what was his name - I do not know.
Kurikov was asked how the hikers could have died.
Kurikov said that near the holy mountain, where this mountain is located, he didn't say, there live five Ostyaks.
They are like savages, they are not friends with Mansi or with Russian people.
They never come to Ivdel.
And these Ostyaks could kill the hikers because they wanted to ascend the holy mountain or because they thought that hikers could kill their deer and moose, which they feed on.
Kurikov expressed only his own assumptions, but what really happened he, Kurikov, couldn't say.
Kurikov saw these savages Ostyakovs some years ago.
Kurikov didn't know where the holy mountain is. I emphasize that Kurikov expressed his own supposition.
He said this since we had a conversation about the dead hikers and asked Mansi Kurikov how it could have happened.
Kurikov Grigoriy Nikolaevich - Mar 23, 1959 (Case files 232)
"I personally do not think that anyone from Mansi attacked Russian hikers, as this never happened before.
I would still hear from Mansi if anybody attacked the hikers because I keep my ears open.
But there is no reason for Mansi to attack hikers. Sacred mountain, I know for sure is in the upper sources of the river.
Nobody lives there in neither summer or winter.
The sacred mountain is not guarded by any one.
Russian people are allowed to go there. About the fact that near the sacred place there live five Mansi or any people, and that they are afraid of Mansi, I personally did not say any such thing, that includes the police.
There are no Mansi people who do not go to Ivdel.
There were no outsiders in the area, that Mansi did not know about. We would have known about strangers, that is, because Mansi hunt and would have met them.
There are no Mansi in the region that would have treated Russians badly."
So Grigoriy Nikolaevich Kurikov doesn't know where the sacred mountain is in the beginning of March (Gorbushin testimony), but he does on Mar 23. Could it be because Bahtiyarovs said where the sacred mountain is on Mar 10, 1959?
How about the five people?
Grigoriy Nikolaevich denies to have said anything like that. On one hand we have Deputy of the Ivdel City Council, and on the other hand a Militia officer.
Nobody bothers to follow up on the discrepancies in their testimonies?
Nikolay Pavlovich Anyamov - Apr 2, 1959 (Case files 261-262)
"In early February 1959, we, i.e. I, Andrey Anyamov, and another Andrey Anyamov, went hunting.
We hunted for 9 days in the forest and during that time we saw tracks of narrow skis, which were covered with 15 cm of snow, less in the forest.
We thought that some kind of expedition went to the mountains.
We saw the tracks along the Auspiya river on the 10th of February 1959.
When we came home we said that we saw tracks of skiers.
The hikers themselves we did not see or hear."

Andrey Aleekseevich Anyamov - Маr 23, 1959 (Case files 230-231)
"I clarified that in January-March, in 1959, I never saw hikers anywhere.
And only saw tracks of hikers - on the road there were tracks of narrow skis.
How many people could not be determined.
I saw tracks on the Lozva river 1,5 - 2 km above Auspiya.
The tracks were going towards Auspiya river, and then to the Urals Mountains.
I can not tell the exact date when I saw the tracks, but it was at the end of January or early February 1959.
Tracks were swept up on clear places, and in the forest powdered with snow.
I went skiing, together with me were three more people.
Anyamov Andrey (same name as mine) Alekseevich, my nephew, Anyamov Nikolay Pavlovich, another of my nephews, and Mansi Tseskin Konstantin.
On the hunt, the four of us left the village of Suevat-Paul and hunted in the woods around the Auspiya.
Russian hikers are nowhere to be seen.
When we hunted it was good weather, and also there were bad days."
Two people that were together say different things about where the narrow ski tracks were spotted.
On April 2 tracks along Lozva river are no longer present in the testimony.

Upper Lozva is Otorten → upper Auspiya is Kholat Syakhl (Peak 1079)
It looks like the investigators needed a testimony where Lozva is not mentioned.
Were the testimonies cooked on the go, as the investigation unfolded?
The testimony from Mar 23 is given by 58 old Mansi, who could be called later own confused due to his age.
How could he tell the direction of the tracks is not clear.
Then the young hunter age 23 comes into the picture with a testimony from Apr 2 that says nothing about tracks on Lozva river.
Pavel Vasilyevich Bahtiyarov - Mar 16, 1959 (Case files 223)
"Prayer mountain is 30 km from us in the upper reaches of Vizhay river.
The mountain is visited by all Russian men and women and Mansi.
There is no prohibition whatsoever for the Russians to go to the mountain.
I have never been in the upper reaches of Lozva river and always hunted along the rivers Ivdel and Vizhay."
Why is he mentioning upper Lozva river?
There is nothing in the context of the previous narration unless he was asked for Lozva river.

Boris Efimovich Slobtsov - Apr 15, 1959 (Case files 298-230)
"I was present when we found under same cedar a cloth belt of dark color with tassels at the ends.
I don't know who this item belongs to.
The length of this item is about 80 cm, the width is about 10 cm, looks like a belt or strap, with which the Mansi pull loads, except the object would be not strong enough for this purpose."

Georgiy Ivanovich Ryazhnev - Mar 6, 1959 (Case files 42-43)
Chief of the 1st forestry department of Energo Lesokombinat in 41st district in 1959
"I don't know anything about Mansi having sacred mountains and paying stones in our area, but I have heard from people that they have the sacred pit on Lozva river."
This statements is opening the door for the speculation that Dyatlov group must have passed by a sacred pit with uncle Slava when they were using his horse drawn sleigh to carry their backpacks.
Yudin was still with them, he returned next day.
There is nothing to support that the hikers even knew about the sacred pit they drove by, but this is a theory.
The Sacred Places of the Ural Mountains and Forests (2004) [Rus - Культовые памятники горно-лесного Урала] is a study by archeologist and ethnologist Chernetsov.
The author writes about of Lozvinzkaya, or Sheytan pit.
Women were not allowed in these sacred places.
In Dyatlov group there are two girls.
In the book Chernetsov says that when he was traveling in these places in 1937 he was told that on Ushma river there is a Bahtiyarov clan sanctuary.
Ushma river is tributary to Lozva river south of 2nd Northern.
Left arrow shows the sanctuary, the right arrow shows petroglyphs that some people see Photo taken on Jan 28, 1959 Krivonischenko camera (film 1) frame 2
Bakhtiyarov family did not take part in the search for the missing hikers and when questioned about their whereabouts they got confused in their testimonies.
The Bakhtiyarovs were considered a respected shamanistic clan.
There is Nikita Yakovlevich Bakhtiyarov, born in 1873, who lived in Ivdel district.
In 1938, he was sentenced to five years in prison camps.
The statement on Bakhtiyarov’s arrest reads: “He is convicted of being an illegal shaman among the Mansi people, a big kulak who has large herds of deer unknown to the state authorities, on whose pasture he exploits the poor Mansi.
He leads anti-Soviet agitation among Mansi against the unification of Mansi into collective farms, against sedentarism, incites hatred among Russians and the existing Soviet system, claiming that the Russians bring only death to Mansi.
Bakhtiyarov annually collects all the Mansi to one of the spurs of the Ural Range, called Vizhay, where he performs sacrifices on the occasion of a religious holiday that lasts up to two weeks.”
Nikita Yakovlevich got out of prison in 1943.
He might still have been around at the time of the events.
Investigating the Mansi could explain the presence of KGB since they were not only responsible for the national security of the state and defending the borders.
Inside the Soviet Union the Committee for State Security was mainly entrusted with anti soviet propaganda, fighting saboteurs and terrorists.
But there is another role too, to subdue any nationalist movements and ethnic hatred.

















#1139 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 30 październik 2019 - 22:12



Mansi, Mansi, Mansi
After February 21 the search of Dyatlov group was coordinated from Ivdel by the local prosecutor Tempalov and representatives of the UPI Yuri Blinov and chairman Lev Gordo.
Yuri Blinov is a member of the Bureau of the Tourist Section of the UPI, and the leader of the group of hikers who, along with Igor Dyatlov's group, was traveling on the same train, then on the same bus, from Sverdlovsk through Serov - Ivdel to the village of Vizhay.
Tempalov received instructions from the secretary of the Ivdel city committee of the KPSS, Prodanov, to start searching for the missing hikers (and Prodanov himself was ordered from Sverdlovsk by regional party and state authorities).
From Sverdlovsk was ordered aerial search.
Prodanov requested the engineer of the Energo Lesokombinat Mikhail Timofeevich Dryakhlih, who communicated with Dyatlov group in the 41st district, to join the search.
Now the only fact that is clear is that Dyatlov group is missing.
It was still to be found what route did they take.
The search operation needed witnesses.
Mansi Nikolay Bakhtiyarov had said that at end of January a group of students (8 people, including one or two women) stayed overnight at his brother Petr Bakhtiyarov’s Yurt.
Mansi settlements in the area, such as Suyevat Paul, consisted of several yurts (nomadic tents), and all of the people were carrying the last last name.
The small settlement were called the Bakhtiyarov Yurt, Khandybin Yurt Anyamov Yurt...
“In the yurt we talked to the hikers.
They said that they are going to the mountains but didn’t specify which one exactly.
They only asked which way is better to go – on the river or some other way, and they went along the road toward the river".
Now we know that these students were from the city of Rostov and headed to Vels peak.
Igor Fomenko led this group.
In February 1959 the lead had to be checked although Bakhtiyarov Yurt was not on Dyatlov group way to Otorten.
But then again, the rescuers didn't have a map to follow.
And the photo of Bakhtiyarov’s family below was made by students from MGU in 1956 that were going to Mt. Otorten.
Vizhay, Bakhtiyarov Yurt and the direction of Otorten.
February 22
Engineer Mikhail Timofeevich Dryakhlih and UPI sports club chairman Lev Gordo landed in Vizhay with a helicopter.
They took forester Kuznetsov and flew to North Toshemka river to the yurt of Alexander Prokakopevich Anyamov (Mansi).
They talked to him.
Then flew to the upper sources the Vizhay river, above the tributary of Anchuchа.
They landed, Dryakhlih and Kuznetsov visited Mansi Bakhtiyarov 5 yurts.
After that they flew west to the Urals and saw a clear track of the Mansi dog sled that went from Bakhtiyarov yurt Vizhay river 1.5 km west to the Urals.
No traces of the missing hikers were found.
Varvara Kuzmovna Bakhtiyarova and her children Miron and Albina, 1956
Moscow was made aware of the incident, and soon also sent a few experienced hikers.
Eugene Maslennikov, the head of the UPI sports club, was appointed to coordinate the search, together with Colonel George Ortyukov of the Army, who was in charge of overall logistics and helicopter support.
Slobtsov group of 11 assembled first and consisted mainly of UPI students: Boris Slobtsov, Vadim Brusnitsin, Stas Devyatov, Yuri Koptelov, Vyacheslav Krotov, Vladimir Lebedev, Vladimir Strelnikov, Vyacheslav Khalizov, Mikhail Sharavin.
The group also included two local residents - forester Ivan Pashin and hunter Alexei Cheglakov of the Ministry of Internal Affairs with experience in the taiga.
Several prison guards from the Ivdel LAG under the leadership of Captain Alexey Chernyshov and another seven officers of MVD (cops) under command of lieutenant Potapov have joined the search in the Dyatlov group.
Another three groups were formed in UPI from student volunteers under the leadership of Oleg Grebennik, Moises Akselrod and Boris Slobtsov.
Additionally, four Mansi hunters were hired to help and look for the missing group.
Moscow sent several specialists including E.P. Maslennikov, Baskin, Bardin and Shuleshko.
Slobtsov rescue group was transported on An-2 from Sverdlovsk to the military airfield of Ivdel with equipment and weekly supply of products.
Waited for a airlift by a helicopter but the weather was prohibitive.
Slobtsov group had to spent the night in Ivdel.
Headquarters of the Ural Military District
To investigate the tragedy in Mt Kholat Syakhl, a state commission was established consisting of Major-General M. N. Shishkarev, Deputy Chairman of the Sverdlovsk Regional Executive Committee V. Pavlov, Head of the Sverdlovsk Regional Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union F. T. Ermash, Prosecutor of Sverdlovsk N. I. Klinov and Major-General of Aviation M. I. Gorlachenko.


















#1140 fortyck



  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17162 postów
  • Płeć:Mężczyzna
  • Lokalizacja:Kraków

Napisano 30 październik 2019 - 22:18



When was the tent found and why was it kept a secret for two days
All rights belong to Komsomolskaya Pravda. Autors Nikolay Varsegov и Natalya Varsegova
There is another big mystery in the Dyatlov case to which many researchers for some reason did not pay attention, and this is the behavior of two searchers: local forester Pashin and his friend Cheglakov, that conducted themselves strange at the least.
It is well known fact that Dyatlov group tent was discovered by students Boris Slobtsov and Mihail Sharavin on February 26th.
According to Boris and Mihail, that day, together with Pashin, they went out to the side of Mount Kholat Syakhl and saw the tent from afar.
Pashin said he was tired and did not approach the tent.
And the students rushed briskly to this long-awaited find.
In the same place on the roof of the tent, they found a flashlight that lit when turned on.
They also found an ice ax with which they opened the tent and saw things that were randomly laid out in it: clothes, shoes, blankets, etc.
The students told the investigator about all this, found on February 26, and he recorded it.
But! if we read carefully the testimonies of the forester Pashin and his friend Cheglakov, we will be surprised.
This is what witness Ivan Pashin says to the investigator on March 7, 1959.
Punctuation saved.
"On February 23, 1959 6 of us were dropped off from a helicopter in the area of Mount Otorten ​​to look for the lost group of hikers.
On the first day of the search, once descended into the Auspiya we found ski tracks from the hikers.
Here we pitched a tent, spend the night, divided into three groups and went to look for the hikers, as a result of the search we found a tent with belongings that was not clearly seen since it was covered with snow, we did not go into the tent."
Testimony of Pashin
It turns out that Pashin and Cheglakov discovered the tent on February 24th! We read further:
"The tent was found in the upper sources of Auspiya and Lozva at the height of the mountain Verhuspiya.
When we went down from Mantveevska Parma we saw a wide ski trail that followed a trail of a moose.
The Mansi ski trail was 10 km from the tent of the hikers and there were no ski tracks near the tent, Mansi or hikers, since the tent was drifted with snow."
And how to understand this?
It turns out that Pashin and his friend find the tent, which at the same time and in the same area dozens more people are looking for.
But Pashin and Cheglakov, without even looking into the tent, pass somewhere further.
They did not even return to the camp to report the finding (?!).
"On the fifth day of our search (FEBRUARY 27)we found 4 bodies covered with snow and on this day we were taken back home with helicopter to the village of Vizhay."
And this is what Cheglakov told the investigator on March 6.
Punctuation saved.
"At the end of January 1959 the exact date can not remember, I saw at the club in village of Vizhay a group of hikers, among them there were 2 girls.
These hikers left in a truck to 41st district of the Forestry Energolesokombinat.
No one lives in the village of 2nd North mine.
In the third week of February 1959 on the orders of the Chief of the logging branch Hakimov, together with the forester Ivan Pashin I flew by helicopter to the site of the death of a group of hikers near Mount Otorten.
With us together in the same helicopter were 4 people and from Ivdel the same day came another 5 people.
We start to carry out the assigned tasks same day we arrived.
The search of hikers started in two groups (Pashin is talking about 3 groups - ed. note).
One person left on the protection of belongings and tents.
On the first day of our search we found the ski tracks of the hikers.
On the second day we found the tent of the hikers which was located in the upper reaches of rivers Auspiya and Lozva at the height of the mountain Verhuspiya."
Cheglakov, like Pashin, claims that they found the tent on the second day of the search, that is, on February 24!
"It was badly drifted by snow. We did not go inside.

We couldn't see any ski tracks of the hikers around the tent.
Mansi ski tracks we have seen 10 km from where the tent of the of the hikers was found.
One kilometer from the camping site of the hikers we found new Mansi stand.

... On the fifth day of searching we found 4 bodies, one of them female.
After that we were taken home by helicopter to village of Vizhay."
Pashin and Cheglakov didn't tell anybody about this essential finding neither on February 24, returning to the base camp, nor on February 25, nor on the 26th, everybody else in the serach party is looking for this tent, and they both say nothing to nobody.
And, judging by the protocol, even the investigator doesn’t have any reaction to that.
Maybe someone gave instructions to Pashin and Cheglakov ahead of time not to tell anyone about the tent, and the investigator knows this?
This is where modern conspiracy theorists come in.
Interestingly, students Slobtsov and Sharavin, who were the "first to discover" the tent on February 26, do not see next to it tracks from Pashin and Cheglakov ski who were there two days ago.
She was probably covered in snow.
And if so, then apart from Pashin and Cheglakov days earlier, to the tent could have been any number of people without leaving tracks.
These people could have forgotten a flashlight on the roof of the tent, the battery of which did not have time to discharge in the cold.
However, Pashin and Cheglakov could have left the flashlight.
But why they didn't they report the loss?
A flashlight at that time was a valuable item.

Sharavin, who found the tent and the cedar


From E. G. Zinovyov archive

28 Feb 1999 Interview with M. P. Sharavin (Y. Yudin, Е. Koskinа) Yekaterinburg
Mihail Sharavin - member of the search in 1959 for Dyatlov group
There is no testimony from Sharavin in the case files.
The thing is that Ivanov didn't question their observations, and they flew off on something like 28-29 Feb 1969.
There were two groups: 1) Akselrod; 2) Slobtsov.
They round up the leaders of the winter treks of 1959.
Slobtsov just came back from Taganaya (12 Feb), Akselrod + 5 per joined first, they should have gone to Otorten, same as the Dyatlov group final destination.
Next was Slobtsov group landing at 3 PM on 23 February on the eastern slope of Otorten.
Akselrod verified that there is no note left on Otorten (meaning Dyatlov group haven't been to Otorten - ed. note), and the search group headed back to the route.
Overnight with a stove on the 4th tributary to Lozva river.
On the second day crossed Dyatlov group ski track (i.e. 24 Feb) on Auspiya, they spent the night there, snow cover was 180 mm on the ski track.
Went along 4th tributary rather than on the ridge, since the chances that there will be ski tracks on top are slim.
On the morning of the 25th, divided into groups, Sharavin + went to the pass, the rest in the radial direction to do a search.
Slobtsov and Sharavin went down the slope, the track was visible to the tree line, then it was lost and appeared sporadically.
To the end of the forest, the snow was quite loose.
We started at at 9-10 AM.
The boot rock (now called the monument - ed. note) was visible, we went to it. A firefighter* from Ivdel walked with them, he said that he was unwell and could not walk, and then they had to go in the direction of the lake near Otorten, because when you look from Otorten, the deer below look like small dots.
At one point, Sharavin looked around and saw a black speck on the slope.
It was getting dark, 5 PM. They went closer - a tent, a ice ax was stuck next to it and there was 1 pair of skis.
Helga (Yeah ... It took them from From 9 AM to 5 PM to climb with no weight from serach camp to tent, and there are so many questions about why did Dyatlov group with load and everything cover so little distance that day.)
When they try to cut through the firn with an ice ax in the hope of finding someone, apparently damaged the tent.
E.G. (No word about that in the tent examination!)
They found jackets, boots (8 pairs).
Where was the tent?
800 meters from the tree line, above the boot rock, where they found Zina.
They cleared 1/3 from the firn.
At the entrance lay a camera, baked ham, in large pieces.
(By the way, why didn't the animals eat it, were the animals killed too? E.G. )
A flask of alcohol, a stove completely disassembled, a group diary, a flashlight, blankets, backpacks were spread out.
In the stove, there were logs 40-50mm in diameter, there was not much firewood - it was kindling.
Ran back, taking the flask, diary.
P.S. The way the tent was set up could only be done by the hikers themselves - backpacks neatly spread out - if you are not a mountaineer you can't put it that way.
It was obvious that the tent was set up slowly, securely, neatly.
The pipe from the stove did not stick outside.
We went down for the night, opened the stove, drank alcohol.
Someone (Halizov) came out at night, stumble, tripped over the rope, twisted the prusik, the smoke went into the tent, someone jumped out, someone breathed through the tent.
The fireman went out and slept by the fire.
There was so much confusion. 26 Feb
The next morning, February 26th.
They were going to climb Auspiya to bring down the tent in Lozva valley.
What for?
Footprints ~ 25 m were leading down from the tent (we did not go further).
Traces began at 2-3 m from the tent, a few tracks. How many?
I didn't count.
How did the footprint survive?
The track is trampled, the loose snow around is blown out, there remains a pedestal of snow.
Why go up the slope?
There is a flat area, you can conveniently pitch the tent there.
There were no signs of a missile breaking nearby, there was no damage..., a burnout line, no trace of extraneous presence.
We went to the boot rock, saw a cedar down in the ravine, we went there.
There was the body of Doroshenko covered with a blanket.
Dropped the backpacks and ran up in horror - on the pass a helicopter was landing with searchers and a rescue dog.
The ground under the cedar tree was bare, 80 мм diameter, because the area is elevated, there was a small fire.
This could be called an attempt to make a fire.
There were a few limbs and coals, it was incomprehensible - how could this fire ever burn?
On such a windy place.
It was clear that Doroshenko was put there, in underwear, half-dressed, covered, his hands were burned while trying to warm his numb fingers.
Did he put his hands in the fire?
Nothing but a blanket around the fire was seen, a dark brown blanket.
How could they make a fire?
There were no traces of birch trees, they kindled them with thin dry branches ...
From the cedar (below) the branches were broken so that you cannot reach with your hand.
Krivonischenko: lay next, because the spot was one.
It was evident that they could not carry them away.
Came to choose a place, and there the bodies!
Doubt: whether Ivanov was there at all, most likely not, they were picked up and carried.
Carried on hand!
No one went to the tent, Sharavin approached the helicopter, another went to meet the group to report.
Mansi came on the 26th, with a radio operator, on deer.
Therefore, on the 26th were reported in the morning by radio, the helicopter had already landed on the radiogram.
Ivanov flew in on the 26th, met with Sharavin on the 27th!
Guides with a dog began a search from the tent on the 26th.
A flask of alcohol was taken from the tent, later on passed among the searchers.
There was the impression that the tent was cut from inside; we didn't find a knife in the tent.
They decided to go to bed without the stove - it was not taken out of its case.
The first group was immediately evacuated: they were mentally traumatized 29 Feb
P.S. Firefighter: He couldn't ski well, didn't know the terrain, as a guide was very inadequate, pretended to be sick on the pass, behaved strangely, didn't have a map, he was hanging around without work.
There was an opinion that he was a strange bird.
He spent the night outside the tent, when Halizov faltered and stepped on his face with his foot.
(Fireman + weirdo + spent the night outside the tent)
P.P.S. So, testimony was taken only from the leaders of the group?
* Sharavin is confusing Pashin’s occupation to be firefighter when he is a forester - ed. note



















Użytkownicy przeglądający ten temat: 0

0 użytkowników, 0 gości, 0 anonimowych