"and the All-Russian TV and Radio Company at the site of the death of a tourist group of Sverdlovsk students. The result was the newly published investigative book" The Secret of the Dyatlov Pass. "

Nikolai Andreev offers his view on numerous versions of the causes of the tragedy to the readers of our magazine.

Fees

The story of the death of nine tourists on the night of February 1-2, 1959 is known to everyone. I have met only two people who have not even heard of her - a young ballerina and a 90-year-old woman. The rest know the plot to the smallest detail. And not only they know, but with ardor and persistence they try to solve the mystery - and what outlandish versions you will not hear!

And for a long time I was indifferent to old events. You never know if tourists and climbers are dying - people test themselves in extreme situations, often on the verge of life and death. But at some point I was hooked. And carried away by a stormy stream.

The story is magical. The more you delve into the circumstances, facts, evidence, documents that describe the tragedy of a group of tourists led by Igor Dyatlov, the sharper the feeling: a breathtaking mystery unfolds before you. The impression that it is skillfully invented. Masterfully thought out. Every fact is a mystery. Every detail is puzzling. Whatever deed, it is overwhelming with illogicality.

Whenever possible, I thoroughly studied the events of 1959 - I sat in the archives, met with those who knew the Dyatlovites and participated in the search operation. I got acquainted with all popular versions. Almost wrote a book. One thing was missing - to visit the site of the tragedy. And when, in early March 2019, I did this as part of the Komsomolskaya Pravda expedition and the All-Russian Television and Radio Company, I realized that everything is not as it really is.

Yes, while working on the book, I carefully studied the photographs of the pass and the view from it of the valley into which the Dyatlovites ran; a snapshot of a cedar at which they lit a fire; meticulously examined the schemes that the search engines sketched; - but everything fell into place only when he was at the place where the tent stood.

From the pass, the versions that have been trying to explain the causes of the tragedy for many decades are presented in a completely different way.

Transition

From Vizhai, the northernmost village of the Sverdlovsk region, we got to the pass by snowmobiles. More precisely, we got to the base camp, from which another six kilometers to the pass. The journey took ten hours.

When you rush on a snowmobile on the ice of the Lozva River, and around there are wild impenetrable forests, then the thought of one thing: what did the Dyatlovites experience during the hike? What is the logic of their actions and deeds in the last hours of their lives? In order to reach the pass, we took advantage of modern technical capabilities. And in the winter of 1959, the only form of transport was skiing. When you see these spaces without end and edge, you understand what colossal efforts the Dyatlovites spent on the route. But they walked and walked towards their intended goal.

An entry from their common diary: "We set off at about 10 am. It’s hard to walk. The skis are buried in snow. We tried to adhere to the Auspiya River several times, but there was water under the snow, the skis were covered with ice. We had to stop and clean it off. drowning in the snow. "

To this day, enthusiasts go to the pass on skis. We met a group from Yekaterinburg - seven girls and two guys. Nine people, as in the Dyatlov group. The girls are sociable, cheerful. They went to the pass not to solve a secret, but to test themselves.

Like their predecessors sixty years ago.

Today one can get to the pass by whatever means. In summer, all-terrain vehicles, motor boats, on foot. In winter, skiing, snowmobiling and even dog sledding.

Pass

At the pass, we reproduced the situation as close as possible to the situation that developed on the night of February 1–2, 1959. The place where the tent stood was calculated with an accuracy of several meters. I was entrusted with digging a hole in the snow, and experienced people set up a tent - identical to the one that the Dyatlovites took with them. It is tarpaulin, bulky, very heavy, weighs almost 20 kilograms. We installed it in relatively good weather - it was clear that the wind did not knock us down. And they did it at dusk, turning into night, under powerful gusts of wind.

The Dyatlovites had exactly the same tent ...

On the slope of the tent there are cuts, approximately the same size and geometry that the first investigators discovered.

By the light, we examined the pass for the first time. He's not impressive. Or put it this way: it doesn't scare you. Yes, these are not the hills of the Central Russian Uplands, but they are not Caucasian rocks, peaks and gorges either. I am not a tourist, except for a few student two-day hikes, but I realized that with proper preparation I could do this route too. Nothing terrible, nothing super dangerous.

The Dyatlovites were not supposed to die, but they did.

Together with the TV man Andrei Malakhov, they went all the last way of the Dyatlovites - from a tent to a cedar. First, a rocky slope, on which there is almost no snow. The stones, however, are sharp. Malakhov said:

I walk along the slope and understand: it is impossible to run this one and a half kilometers in socks in the snow in any condition.

Impossible, but they ran.

And it became completely incomprehensible when we reached the ravine covered with snow. We climbed over it on snowshoes. And the cameraman Alexander Lukyanov was in shoe covers - and instantly fell to the waist, he could not go further. How the Dyatlovites overcame this obstacle - the mind does not comprehend. Well, no way to get over the snowy quagmire - they had no snowshoes, not even skis. Even a healthy person could not pass directly, and some of them were injured. Plus, they moved in the dark.

And on the other side of the ravine again you fall into a stupor from the question: why did they throw the fire? During the expedition, many experiments were carried out with the help of which we tried to understand the logic of human behavior 60 years ago. An example is an extinct fire near a cedar, near which the bodies of Krivonischenko and Doroshenko were found. We lit a fire in the same place - it turned out to be easy, there are a lot of dry forests around. Malakhov effortlessly broke a dry tree four meters high. She also went into the fire - it flared up, gained strength. And now a big fire is already blazing, near which you can warm up, wait, discuss the situation and options for how to get out of it.

A bonfire is warm. Warmth is life. What do we see in the photographs of that time? Extinct bonfire. Two numb bodies - Doroshenko and Krivonischenko. Three froze on their way to the tent. Four died by the stream. But why did they leave the fire ?! Gone from the warmth that would keep them alive?

No matter how much I ponder the situation at the cedar, nothing sensible comes to mind. I know one thing: it shouldn't have been this way. It shouldn't, but it happened. Mystic.

Avalanche and Associate Professor

One of the most popular versions, which tries to comprehensively explain all the events on the night of February 1–2, is an avalanche. Briefly, its essence: an avalanche approached the tent, the guys in panic ripped the slope of the tent and, fleeing the avalanche, ran down.

Our expedition included an avalanche specialist - Viktor Popovnin, associate professor of the Faculty of Geography of Moscow State University. We approached the tent with him, assessed the slope on which she stood. I did not see the conditions for the formation of an avalanche - the slope is gentle, you can climb without effort. From my point of view, nothing indicated that snow could melt here.

Popovnin saw something different:

On slopes as steep as on the Dyatlov pass, avalanches with a certain preparation of the snow mass can easily form. The slope, which has a steepness of about 20 degrees, is considered avalanche-hazardous by all standards. Sometimes, even at 12 degrees of the slope, conditions are favorable for the formation of an avalanche. In this particular case, the slope is slightly more than 20 degrees. This is enough for the snow mass to start moving. Traditionally, an avalanche is understood as a swift mass of snow with a dust cloud. A terrible sight. But an avalanche can be in the form of a layer shift, in the form of a snow board. Snowsheet is a scientific glaciological term that means the compressed top layer of snow. And this layer of snow, under certain conditions, moves along the underlying, loose. A snow slab can travel very long distances - tens, hundreds of meters.

Popovnin, on the basis of his measurements, concluded that the snow slab could presumably slide over the tent. That is, the avalanche's convergence is not excluded, but it could not give impetus to the chain of mysterious, even mystical actions of tourists.

The avalanche version does not explain many of the events that tragic night. Well, for example: does not explain the reasons for fleeing a distance of about one and a half kilometers to the cedar. They would have jumped out of the tent, ran, but after 50 meters, well, after 100 meters, they would have stopped, looked back: there’s nothing dangerous behind them - the avalanche is not chasing them, and the tent is still there. But they ran and ran on.

What drove them?

Atomic bomb and musher

All the days of the expedition there was an assessment of versions that try to explain the death of the Dyatlovites. Each one seems slightly different when you start trying it on specifically on the spot.

The version of a certain Rakitin about "controlled delivery" is very popular. Its essence is that the KGB and the FBI have agreed to meet their agents at Mount Otorten. The CIA special agents were dropped by parachute, and the Dyatlov group, in which three security officers - Zolotarev, Krivonischenko, Doroshenko, moved to the designated point. The purpose of the meeting is to transfer radioactive materials to the Americans.

It's already wild: for two fiercely warring special services to suddenly carry out a joint operation ?! Okay, even so. But when you are at the pass, this version seems comical. Only children playing spies could have thought of making an appointment in such a cruel place. Why trudge to the edge of the Northern Urals, overcome unthinkable difficulties, jump with a parachute with unclear chances of being exactly at the appointed place at exactly the appointed time - this is from the category of an obscure fantasy. But full of furious adherents of this version. They are not affected by logic, common sense, or the absence of even the slightest documentary or witness evidence of the "controlled delivery" operation invented by the dreamer Rakitin.

However, people fervently believe in the most absurd things. On the way to the pass, we met a dog team. Yekaterinburg resident Sergey takes tourists on it to the Dyatlov pass. We talked with him. Someone asked him what he thought about the reasons for the death of the Dyatlovites. He instantly replied: "Atomic bomb tests. There is a nuclear test site." - "What makes you think that there is a nuclear test site at the pass?" - "Grandfathers say".

Sergei, by the way, has been to the pass many times and could not help noticing: there was not the slightest sign of a nuclear test site. Their location on the territory of the USSR is no longer a state secret, and there was nothing like it in the Northern Urals. Yes, detonate the atomic bomb in the vicinity of Mount Otorten, the traces of the terrible explosion would be visible and convincing, and the nuclear mushroom would be visible in Sverdlovsk. But the atomic version holds firm. In Yekaterinburg - I heard it myself - many are still firmly convinced of it.

Nikolai Andreev: Only on the spot can you see unexpected details ...

Sinister Mansi and Nastya

In our base camp, something like the commandant was Nastya Ayamova, a Mansi by nationality. A young, sweet, friendly face. Low talkative, like all her fellow tribesmen. Nevertheless, I managed to find out a lot of interesting things from her - about the life of the Mansi. And one fact shocked me: Nastya was invited to study at the University of Budapest, and she refused. "Why?!" - I was surprised. “I'm better here,” she replied simply. I looked around: taiga, snow, sky beautifully tinted by the sun, cold.

Franz Kafka wrote in his diary: "Why the Chukchi do not leave their terrible land, anywhere they would live better in comparison with their present life and their present desires." He could write the same about Mansi. On the way to the pass, one of the stopping points is the Mansi village of Ushma. Sad impressions. I went into one of the houses. The stove, the bed, the table, absolutely empty shelves - that's the whole furnishings.

In 1959, the investigation named Mansi as the first suspects. As if the reason for the murder - tourists invaded the sacred place. The journalist Grigoriev, who participated in the search operation in 1959, notes in his notebook: "There is a slander in the Mansi. That there is a mountain of worship and as if the Mansi were killed on this mountain."

There is nothing more stupid than to accuse this calm, quiet people of a terrible crime - murder. The witnesses, without saying a word, said the same thing about the Mansi to the investigator - the people were friendly, not militant. Here are a couple of excerpts from various interrogation protocols:

"There has never been a case that the Mansi ever attacked me and other hunters of Russian nationality. They always treated Russians friendly and showed hospitality to everyone ..."

"The Mansi could not attack tourists, on the contrary, knowing their customs, they could even help the Russians. There were cases that in these places the Mansi took out lost people and created living conditions with their food ..."

When you read the protocols of the interrogations of the Mansi hunters, you get the impression that the investigators themselves do not believe in their guilt. Duty attempts to put pressure on them can be traced, but the Mansi kept calm, unperturbed. And when the expert's data arrived that the tent was cut from the inside, it became finally clear: the peaceful northern people had nothing to do with it. And they were released.

Back in 1959, it was clear that the Mansi had nothing to do with the death of the Dyatlovites. But they are still being tortured with the question: is it true that the Dyatlovites were killed because they wandered into a place sacred for Mansi? And most often Volodya Anyamov is tortured - he is a regular participant in TV shows that touch on the topic of the Dyatlov Pass. And he always says the same thing: there is no sacred place near Mount Otorten, and there never was, and if there was, the Mansi would never have started to kill someone who accidentally wandered there.

I met Volodya at the pass, asked: didn't you get tired of saying the same thing? He just smiled.

Nastya Ayamova is the "commandant" of our group.

Main question...

The question did not give me rest at the pass: how far from the tent could the horror drive the Dyatlovites before they came to their senses? It doesn't matter what the cause of fear is - an avalanche, rocket, Bigfoot, infrasound. Let's say a man escaped from a burning building - at what distance will he stop? Most likely, not more than 200 meters away. And he will watch the raging fire with fear, but he will not move further - he feels safe.

The Dyatlovites fled from a certain threat to their lives for one and a half kilometers. Most likely, they stopped, assessed the degree of threat, and ran further. We ran to the cedar. What could drive, drive and drive them further from the tent?

On the pass on the night of February 1 to February 2, such events took place and people committed such acts, many of which cannot be explained by rational logic. The impression is that nine people have gone mad at the same time. Something frightened them to death, and they rushed down. But after 200-300 meters they would have come to their senses. Well, let it take half a kilometer. They would stop and look around. There is no danger. And come back. But no, they ran on.

So there was something so terrible near the tent, so dangerous, that they ran and ran. What? Didn't see the answer at the pass. Only new and new questions.

... and the main version of the author

After returning from the pass, they asked me: what version do you adhere to? I joked: there must be at least someone standing above all versions - an objective and unflappable expert. Speaking seriously, I am inclined to believe that a tough conflict situation has arisen within the group. I wrote about this in detail in the book.

A group on a campaign is like a crew on a submarine: if a conflict arises, everything possible must be done to extinguish it. And if that fails, the explosion of emotion can be unpredictable. I think something similar happened at the pass on the night of 1 to 2 February 1959.

In my opinion, I rely on the entries in the travel diaries of the Dyatlovites, on letters, on the memories of those who knew them well. Judging by the diary entries, several conflicts smoldered in the group. Just one stroke from Zina Kolmogorova's letter to her friend: “The group is nothing, as soon as we go, I don’t know. Shall we swear? After all, Kolevatov is with us ...” There were enough reasons, and serious ones, for the conflict: perhaps a struggle for leadership between Dyatlov and Zolotarev ... Perhaps the love triangle of Doroshenko - Kolmogorov - Dyatlov ... Perhaps the appearance of a new member Zolotarev in the group ... Perhaps Dubinina's difficult character ...

One of the painful mysteries: why did the Dyatlovites throw a fire? We effortlessly bred it near the same cedar. And they could keep the fire for as long as necessary - there is enough dry forest around.

Tourists fell victim to an avalanche or ...

2] test secret weapons

3] special teams (the group witnessed secret exercises)

4] Mansi (the group ended up in a sacred place)

5] experiment of foreign civilizations

6] joint covert operation of the KGB and the CIA

7] missile wreckage (failed military tests)

8] infrasound - a physical phenomenon that can cause unaccountable fear, panic

9] Bigfoot

10] animals (bear, wolverine, wolves)

11] group conflict

Evgeny Maslennikov's scheme

There are few graphic documents from the scene of the tragedy - in the criminal case there are only three diagrams and two drawings. The most informative is the diagram carefully drawn up by Evgeny Maslennikov. He is an experienced tourist, deputy chief of staff for the search for missing Dyatlovites. The main value of the scheme - Maslennikov indicated the distance from the tent to the corpses of Kolmogorova, Slobodin, Dyatlov, to the cedar, to the platform built by the stream. Most likely, this scheme did little to the investigation - there are no references to it in the criminal case, but for modern researchers of the causes of the tragedy, it is the main document with which they are trying to build the logic of events on the tragic night.

For a person who has not even visited the pass, Maslennikov's scheme gives a clear understanding of the area where everything happened. At the very top is a tent. Downward strokes are traces of the running Dyatlovites. The crosses marked the places where the bodies of Kolmogorova, Slobodin, Dyatlov were found. Anyone can calculate at what distance each of them was found from the tent - Maslennikov gives guidelines. Cedar and cross - the bodies of Krivonischenko and Doroshenko were found here. And the arrow to the right - a platform and the last four corpses were found 70 meters away. The important details on the diagram are the three ridges of stones that the Dyatlovites overcame, the steepness of the ravine slope, the steepness of the pass on which the tent stood.

I am not under the illusion that my version is the only correct one. After the book came out, there was a flood of responses. Perhaps the truth will be found among them ...

Dyatlov pass in virtual reality

In the spring of 2019, RIA Novosti specialists developed a project "The mystery of the Dyatlov pass. AR-reconstruction of the main versions". This is a story in augmented reality (AR) format that will allow you to delve into the details and reasons for the death of the Dyatlov group. A snow-covered slope will appear on the table in front of you - the way the first search engines saw it in February 1959. You will be able to see details and evidence from a criminal case, as well as reconstructions of three versions of what happened, connecting these evidences into a single picture.

Among the recreated versions are avalanches, a Mansi attack and classified military trials. Interactive elements in the project allow the user to directly participate in the investigation. Audio commentary explains and reveals what is happening. Scenes can be viewed in any order and sequence.

The project uses key studies of the tragedy: "The Mystery of the Death of the Dyatlov Group. Documentary Investigation" by Yevgeny Buyanov and Boris Slobtsov, "The Price of State Secrets - Nine Lives" by Anatoly Gushchin, "Death under the Secret" stamp by Oleg Arkhipov and materials by other experts.

To see the AR-reconstruction "The Secret of the Dyatlov Pass", download the RIA.Lab application atApp Store for iOS orGoogle Play for Android ... Augmented reality works on ARKit (iOS) and ARCore (Android) devices. Check ifdo you have ARCore installed ... The project is available for the following devices: iPhone 6s and above, iPad 2017 and above, phones with Android 7.0 or later.

https: //www.site/2019-12-18/rodstvenniki_pogibshih_na_perevale_dyatlova_ne_smogli_dobitsya_putina_novogo_rassledovaniya

Relatives of those killed at the Dyatlov pass could not get a new investigation from Putin

Jaromir Romanov / website

An appeal to Russian President Vladimir Putin did not help the relatives of Igor Dyatlov's tour group members, who died in 1959 in the Northern Urals under mysterious circumstances, to force the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation to initiate a new criminal case into the incident. Yuri Kuntsevich, a representative of the Dyatlov Group Memory Fund, told the site about this. “From the Russian presidential administration, our appeal was passed on to [the head of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation, Alexander] Bastrykin, and Bastrykin passed it on to [Russian Prosecutor General Yuri] Chaika. From there they let him go to the prosecutor's office of the Sverdlovsk region, where a check is already underway. That's it - the circle is closed! " - said Kuntsevich.

According to him, on December 20, members of the foundation intend to hold a round table at the Museum of History of UrFU and work out a memorandum on the current situation there. This memorandum will again be sent to the Kremlin, the TFR and the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation.

The lawyer Yevgeny Chernousov, who is involved in this case, explained in detail to the correspondent of our publication about why the relatives of the members of the Dyatlov group and friends of the deceased tourists demand to resume the investigation again. According to him, the facts indicate that the criminal case, which was initiated in 1959 and was closed after three months of investigation, was fiction.

“The prosecutor [Ivdel Vasily] Tempalov, who initiated this case, in his decision to initiate, in violation of all norms and instructions, did not properly indicate the results of the preliminary investigation that prompted him to initiate a case. This criminal case was not registered, that is, in fact, both the case and the crime itself were hidden from registration. All the persons involved, including the prosecutor of the RSFSR, pretended that everything was fine, and in the end the case was dropped due to lack of composition, while the correct way would be to terminate it for failure to identify the persons involved in the murder of two or more persons. It is clear that such a concealment could have been made only in one case - in the event of a man-made disaster that could not be disclosed. All the versions about escaped prisoners or Mansi are complete nonsense. In this case, the case would have been solved in three weeks and they would not have concealed the perpetrators, ”Chernousov noted.

In October, the relatives of the killed Dyatlovites wrote a letter to Putin, asking him to encourage the Investigative Committee of Russia to open a criminal case about what happened 60 years ago and conduct a normal investigation.

Photo of Pyotr Bartholomew, taken during a campaign with Igor Dyatlov's participation in 1958 and allowed by the author for public use

The last campaign of Igor Dyatlov's group was dedicated to the XXI Congress of the CPSU. For 15 days, the participants of the hike had to ski 300 kilometers along the mountain-taiga part of the north of the Sverdlovsk region and climb two peaks: mountains Otorten and Oyka-Chakur.

Initially, there were ten participants in the campaign: a fifth-year student of the UPI radio faculty Igor Dyatlov (the leader of the campaign), his classmate Zinaida Kolmogorova, an UPI graduate and at that time an employee of the closed SverdNIIkhimmash Rustem Slobodin, a fourth-year student of the UPI radio faculty Yuri Doroshenko, engineer of the Mayak plant Georgy Krivonischenko, a graduate of the civil engineering department of the UPI Nikolay Thibault-Brignolle, a fourth-year student of the same faculty Lyudmila Dubinina, a war veteran, instructor of the Kourovka camp site Semyon Zolotarev, a fourth-year student of the UPI physics and technology Alexander Kolevatov, a fourth-year student of the engineering and economic faculty of the UPI Yuri Yudin.

On January 23, 1959, the group left Sverdlovsk for Serov by train, then on another train to Ivdel. On January 26, the Dyatlovites hiked to the logging village of the 41st quarter, which previously existed behind the taiga village of Vizhay, which was once the center of the colonies scattered around. On January 27, the tourists went with a fellow traveler from the village 41st quarter to the abandoned village of gold miners 2nd Severny. We spent the night there in one of the houses. On January 28, the guide and feeling ill, Yuri Yudin, returned back (they walked separately). And Igor Dyatlov's group moved further on the route. Nobody saw them again alive.

According to the materials of the investigation, they died on the night of February 2 in the area of \u200b\u200bMount Kholatchakhl, or the Mountain of the Dead, in the Northern Urals. However, due to the remoteness of the territory where the emergency occurred, they learned about it much later. Only towards the end of February, when it became clear that the group had not returned from the campaign, began a search with the use of aviation and the release of several search groups at different points of the alleged route of the missing. At the same time, until recently, there were versions according to which people in Ivdel knew about the death of tourists a few days after the tragedy.

Sister of the deceased Igor Dyatlov - about versions of the death of a tourist group in the Urals

The tent of the Dyatlov group was found on February 26 in a place that is now called the Dyatlov pass. A few hours later, the bodies of the group members began to be found. Their search stretched out until May. Attention was immediately drawn to the fact that the tent of the "Dyatlovites" was cut from the inside, and the dead had rather strange injuries. So, Dubinina was diagnosed with an extensive fracture of the ribs, hemorrhage in the right ventricle of the heart, the absence of a tongue in the oral cavity, empty eye sockets. Zolotarev also had a severe rib fracture with internal bleeding and had no eyes. Slobodin and Thibault-Brignoles have severe skull fractures. Krivonischenko has II-III degree burns, up to and including charring of the skin. It feels like the person was burning alive. Some also had cheeks and lips stripped (or eaten away). In addition, many of those who saw the dead noted the strange brick red color of their skin and caked foam near the mouth.

The conclusion reached by the investigation seemed no less unusual. According to him, nine travelers fell victim to "force majeure circumstances." All this subsequently gave rise to a lot of versions about the reasons for their death, including very incredible ones: from an avalanche to ritual murder by local Mansi.

Among others, the so-called "rocket version" sounded - Dyatlov's group died, hitting the area where missile weapons were tested. The exact answer to the question of what happened then at the pass is still unknown.

On February 1 of this year, 60 years after the tragedy, the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation announced the resumption of the investigation into the circumstances of the death of tourists in 1959. The head of the department for supervision over the observance of federal legislation of the Sverdlovsk region prosecutor's office, Andrei Kuryakov, then noted that the relatives of the victims have the right to learn about the cause of the tragedy, even though 60 years have passed since then. In addition, it was said that checking would help prevent a repetition of this.

The priority for the supervisory authority is now three versions of what happened: an avalanche, a snow board (avalanches of a smaller scale), a hurricane. The prosecutor's office is not considering the criminal version.

In mid-March, prosecutors visited the Dyatlov Pass, where they conducted a number of examinations. First of all, they took photographs of the area and, with the help of surveyors, fixed the exact coordinates of the necessary points. Then, in the area of \u200b\u200bthe Belaya Mountain ski complex near Nizhniy Tagil, prosecutors conducted a field experiment, during which nine young people tried to recreate the last hours of the life of the Dyatlov group members. The supervisory authority initially expected to announce their findings in August of this year. The timeline has now been pushed back to February 2020.

The 60th anniversary of the death of the Dyatlov group caused a new powerful surge of public interest in the topic. New versions appear almost every day. The authorities are also making their contribution to the excitement: the prosecutor's office announced a large-scale audit of the circumstances of the death of tourists.

However, in 2015, employees of the Investigative Committee were doing the same - looking for answers to key questions related to the tragedy. We learned previously unpublished details of this study.

Lyudmila Dubinina, Georgy Krivonischenko, Nikolay Thibault-Brignolle and Rustem Slobodin.

The reason why the Investigative Committee of Russia decided then, four years ago, to recall the events of 1959, is similar to that of the current prosecutor's check: appeals from relatives of the deceased tourists, the press and members of the public.

Their traditional addressees are the leadership of law enforcement agencies, but the Presidential Administration is already quite familiar with this topic.

“Vladimir Vladimirovich, I am asking you to initiate the investigation of this criminal case again,” says, for example, a message addressed to the head of state, sent last year by a certain citizen Kovalenko. "All caring people in Russia ... want to know the truth." In response to one of such impulses, the head of the TFR ordered an audit of the case of the death of the Dyatlov group.

Investigator-criminologist Vladimir Solovyov, an authoritative and experienced specialist, was entrusted to study the issue - Vladimir Nikolaevich is known “in the world” primarily as an investigator in the case of the death of the royal family.

Solovyov recruited Sergei Shkryabach, an honorary employee of the TFR, who until 2010 held the post of deputy head of the Main Department of Criminalistics of the Investigative Committee. Unfortunately, a month ago Sergey Yakovlevich passed away. At the time of the inspection, the general was retired, but continued to take an active part in the life of the department.

An important detail: Shkryabach was not only a high-class criminologist, but also an avid climber - a member of more than 25 ascents and 20 expeditions in the Pamir Mountains, Tien Shan, Caucasus, Altai, Eastern Sayan Mountains, Kamchatka and the Arctic. In general, the choice of a partner was far from random.

The result of the check was the "Conclusion on the criminal case on the death of 9 tourists in February 1959 in the Ivdel district of the Sverdlovsk region", signed by Shkryabach and dated July 5, 2015.

This document is remarkable in two respects. Firstly, this is, in fact, the first since 1959 attempt to answer the questions left after the closure of the case, undertaken by an official law enforcement agency.

Secondly, the attempt was very successful: Solovyov and Shkryabach managed to develop a harmonious and consistent - and in the main outline, perhaps, the only possible - version of what happened on the night of February 1 to February 2, 1959 on Mount Holatchakhl.

Holatchahl and negligence

Recall that Igor Dyatlov and his comrades - students and graduates of the Ural Polytechnic Institute and an instructor of the tourist base Semyon Zolotarev, only 9 people - went on their last tour, dedicated to the beginning of the 21st Congress of the CPSU, at the end of January 1959. On January 23 we left Sverdlovsk, on the 28th we began to ski independently.

The hike was supposed to end on February 12th. A week after the group did not get in touch at the appointed time, the search work began.

On February 25, on the eastern slope of Mount Holatchakhl, a snow-covered tent of the group was discovered: only the corner of the roof protruded outward, propped up by the front pillar that remained.

The entrance was closed, and the roof slope facing the slope was cut and torn in two places. The tent contained almost all the equipment, personal belongings of the group members, their outerwear and shoes. Below the tent were footprints without shoes and individual footprints of boots, 8-9 pairs, which led down towards the forest.

The tent of the Dyatlov group, partially freed from snow

The last diary entry of the group - the battle sheet "Evening Otorten" - was dated February 1.

On February 26, the bodies of four Dyatlovites were found. The first to find Yuri Doroshenko and Georgy Krivonischenko - one and a half kilometers from the tent, at the beginning of the forest, near a cedar. The corpses were stripped down to their underwear, next to them were the remains of a fire.

The corpse of the head of the group Igor Dyatlov was found 300 meters from the fireplace in the direction of the tent, and after another 300 meters up the slope - the corpse of Zinaida Kolmogorova. A week later, on March 5, Rustem Slobodin was found at that distance - his body was between the bodies of Dyatlov and Kolmogorova.

Judging by the position of the bodies and the poses in which they froze, death found these three as they tried to return to the tent. They were dressed in sweaters and ski suits, no outerwear. Slobodin was shod in one felt boot; Dyatlov and Kolmogorova had only socks on their feet.

According to the conclusion of the forensic medical examination, the death of all five - Doroshenko, Krivonischenko, Dyatlov, Slobodin and Kolmogorova - occurred as a result of freezing.

Two months later, on May 4, 1959, the bodies of the other four participants in the campaign were found - Lyudmila Dubinina, Alexander Kolevatov, Nikolai Thibault-Brignolle and Semyon Zolotarev - located about 70 meters from the cedar, in the hollow of the stream, under a layer of snow several meters.

They were generally dressed better than the first five: only Dubinina had no outerwear, for two, Zolotarev and Thibault-Brignolet, there were both jackets and warm shoes. But only one of these four, Kolevatov, did not have serious bodily injuries during his lifetime - the expert considered the only cause of his death “exposure to low temperature”.

In addition to signs of freezing, three were found to have terrible injuries. Death Dubinina, according to the forensic physician, "occurred as a result of extensive hemorrhage in the right ventricle of the heart, multiple bilateral rib fracture, profuse internal hemorrhage in the chest cavity."

Zolotarev was diagnosed with "multiple fracture of the ribs on the right with internal bleeding into the pleural cavity", Thibault-Brignol - "depressed fracture of the right temporoparietal region in an area of \u200b\u200b9 × 7 centimeters."

These are the facts. The 1959 investigation, led by the criminal prosecutor of the Sverdlovsk regional prosecutor's office, Lev Ivanov, failed to give them an explanation.

The decision to close the criminal case is one big list of mysteries. It is stated, for example, that "the tent was suddenly abandoned by all the tourists at the same time" - through the cuts made from the inside. But there is not even an assumption about what caused the urgent evacuation and why such a path was chosen for it. More or less confidently it is said only about the absence of a criminal trace: "Neither in the tent, nor near it were there any signs of a struggle or the presence of other people."

There are no attempts to explain the further course of events. Well, the final of the document can generally be called mystical: "It should be considered that the cause of the death of tourists was a spontaneous force, which the tourists were unable to overcome."

In this context, the concept of "elemental force" is tantamount to impure force. By the way, many people perceived it this way. The name of the mountain is very organically intertwined with this esotericism: Kholatchakhl is translated from Mansi as “mountain of the dead”. True, this is a modern translation. Until 1959, it was believed that it was just a "dead mountain", that is, a peak not covered with forest.

However, the specialists of the TFR saw in the case not mysticism, but negligence. First of all, the investigation itself. “The investigation was carried out at a low (unfortunately, even at an amateurish) level,” says the conclusion on the case. - Accurate measurements and binding to certain landmarks of the found objects and corpses are absent in the protocols ...

The circumstances of the events have not been fully clarified. The state and features of the area were not studied. Information about the state of the weather and seismic activity was not requested.

The analysis of the level of extremeness of the situation, readiness and psychology of behavior of group members with the involvement of high-class specialists was not carried out ... "

White death

The level of training of tourists was also rated very low in the TFR: “Most of the members of the group were participants in 4–6 trips during 3–4 years of study at the institute. None of them took part in winter hikes of the 3rd category of difficulty. Dyatlov I.A. participated in only one of these trips ...

Dyatlov's group during the hike

In fact, he “cooked in own juice“- out of 9 campaigns in which he took part, he led 6 himself. It seems that for the leadership of the campaign of this complexity, the level of experience of I.A. did not match. "

In a word, "the preparation of the group members for participation in a difficult winter hike in mountain conditions was clearly insufficient": the Dyatlovites had neither the skills of action in such an environment, nor the appropriate equipment.

At the same time, forensic experts refer to the Dyatlovites themselves: “The entry in the group's diary dated 01/31/1959 speaks about the negative results of this training that at the first attempt to overcome a simple pass in the area of \u200b\u200bheight 880, they, without the necessary equipment and experience, bumped into strong wind on the icy slope, retreated and descended into the valley of the Auspiya River. It is hard to imagine how they intended to overcome 5 passes and climb 2 peaks in the future. "

Another omission is the lack of a full-fledged map of the area: "Considering that their route was a first ascent, the group went almost at random."

Conclusion: “A route of such duration (21 days), length (about 300 km) and complexity, this group could overcome without incident only with sufficiently favorable weather conditions and luck.

Although the decision to admit the group to the campaign, taking into account the formal "experience" of its participants, was recognized as justified, the campaign itself, taking into account their actual readiness and lack of communication, was a dangerous and rather adventurous event.

Any significant mistake under extreme conditions and the lack of the necessary knowledge of how to act when they arise, inevitably lead to tragic consequences in such campaigns, which happened. "

A fatal miscalculation of the Dyatlovites was the choice of the place of their last night. The place was really bad, but not at all because of the shamanic curses.

Analysis of the data of the meteorological stations closest to the place of events allows us to assert that on the night of February 1 to February 2, 1959, a cyclone front passed in the area of \u200b\u200bthe tragedy - in the direction from northwest to southeast. The passage of the front lasted at least 10 hours and was accompanied by heavy snowfall, increased wind to hurricane (20-30 meters per second) and a drop in temperature to minus 40 degrees.

“If we take into account that the storm lasted all day on 02/01/1959 and by its end only intensified, as evidenced by the latest photographs of the group members, the establishment of a camp on the mountainside was a fatal mistake, and the tragedy was inevitable,” the forensic experts are sure.

In their opinion, the tourists were driven out of the tent by an avalanche - in its compact, Ural version. Not a rush, sweeping away everything in its path - in this case, the Dyatlovites simply could not get out - but a relatively unhurried slide in a limited area. In short, a snowy landslide.

They provoked it partly by themselves, cutting off the slope during the installation of the tent: the last photo taken by the Dyatlovites shows how they together dig a hole in the snow under the "foundation".

One of the last shots taken by the Dyatlovites: setting up a tent

Despite the diminutiveness of the avalanche, the danger was no joke at all. Specialists of the TFR dispel the "mistaken idea of \u200b\u200bsnow as a light substance": the greater its mass and moisture content, the greater its density. “Getting into even a small avalanche with a volume of several cubic meters threatens to be fatal,” says the conclusion on the case. “There are enough examples when a layer of snow about 20 cm (!) 3 by 3 meters thick that melted down killed people.”

Three factors

The answer to the question of why the 1959 investigation passed this obvious version is literally on the surface.

“This version was initially ruled out based on an erroneous assessment of the situation,” the forensic experts say. "Most of the participants in the rescue work and representatives of the prosecutor's office observed the scene in good weather 26 days after a significant change in the snow cover."

For almost a month, the wind almost erased the traces of the avalanche: judging by the columns of traces left by tourists, such relief formations remain after blowing off a less dense layer around the seal - at the time of leaving the tent, the snow was at least 40 centimeters higher than when it was found.

According to ICR specialists, a landslide with a mass of at least several tons descended on the tent. The events of the fateful night developed in their view as follows: “The storm continued, and after a while the mass of snow on the slope became critical ...

The initially sliding mass of snow was held back for a short time by the tension of the sinking tent. The first clear signs of an avalanche at night in the dark most likely triggered panic.

The rapidly increasing pressure of the snow made it impossible not only to take outer clothing, but also to leave the tent in an organized manner. Apparently, this process took several seconds.

The last of those who left the tent were already wading through the ever-increasing mass of snow, which forced the tourists to instinctively rush down the slope in the direction of the supposed forest ...

The only way for them to try to survive in those conditions was to try to descend into the forest as quickly as possible, create shelter and provide a warm overnight stay until the weather improves.

In such frost and wind, half-dressed and barefooted tourists could hold out no more than 2-3 hours. They managed to get to the edge of the forest and even kindle a small fire. But then the Dyatlovites made another mistake - they split up.

Igor Dyatlov

The worst dressed Doroshenko and Krivonischenko remained by the fire, but it seemed they were unable to support it and quickly froze. Dyatlov, Kolmogorova and Slobodin made a desperate attempt to break through the hurricane wind to a heaped up tent, where clothes, food and equipment were left, but they overestimated their strength.

The third group descended a little lower, to a tributary of the Lozva River, apparently in search of a more reliable refuge. However, tourists were not lucky here either.

The practice of hiking knows "a significant number of facts of the death of climbers and tourists as a result of falling into voids hidden under the snow," the conclusion on the case says. According to criminologists, Dubinin, Kolevatov, Zolotarev and Thibault-Brignoles were above the snow grotto washed out at the source of the stream: “Apparently, the snow-ice isthmus fell under their weight, and they were covered with a crumbling layer of frozen snow at least 5 meters high” Accordingly, the probable causes of death of the four were a “cocktail” of three factors: injuries sustained during the fall and collapse of the snow-ice arch, suffocation and freezing.

Weapon Trials and Arctida Dwarfs

That, in fact, is all. “Based on the above, the circumstances of the death of tourists have no hidden background, and all the questions and doubts that have arisen are the consequences of unprofessionalism and incomplete work on the case,” the forensic experts summarize.

The unprofessional approach "led to the emergence in the case of information about fireballs, radiological studies of the clothes of the victims, which, naturally, did not give anything for investigation."

However, the TFR experts also did not consider their conclusions to be the ultimate truth: the document states the need to conduct more detailed research with the involvement of experts.

This is exactly what their fellow prosecutors are doing now. It is noteworthy, however, that they "dig" in exactly the same direction. “Crime is completely ruled out,” emphasizes the official representative of the Prosecutor General's Office Alexander Kurennoy. "There is not a single proof, even indirect, that would speak in favor of this version."

The prosecutor's office also does not believe in goblin, aliens, dwarfs of Arctida and tests of top-secret weapons: fantastic scenarios for the death of the group were rejected, as they say, from the doorway. Prosecutors counted 75 versions of the tragedy, of which they chose the three most likely. “All of them are somehow connected with natural phenomena,” explains Kurennoy. - It could be an avalanche, it could be a so-called snow board. Or a hurricane. "

It is not clear, however, why these versions are separated. The descent of a snow board is a type of avalanche, while the wind is the most important factor in its formation, and often a trigger. Well, yes, specialists know better.

However, another, more fundamental question arises: was it worth it to resume the investigation at all? After all, if there is confidence that no one killed the tourists, then the case of the Dyatlov group is of purely historical interest. The guardians of the law clearly have something to do beyond the secrets of the past. In addition, the death of Dyatlovites is far from the most mysterious emergency in the history of mountain tourism. There are a lot of cases when people generally disappeared without a trace.

A typical example: the disappearance of Klochkov's group - four men and two women who traveled in the high-mountainous Pamirs in the summer of 1989. The search lasted for a month, but ended completely in vain. To this day, nothing is known about the fate of the climbers. Most likely, they were hit by an avalanche, but this is just a guess, the scope for imagination is very wide. Much broader than in the case of the Dyatlov group. Nothing prevents, for example, assuming that Pyotr Klochkov and his comrades were kidnapped by aliens.

Nevertheless, the answer to the above question is still in the affirmative: yes, it is worth, in the case of the Dyatlov group, an end must be made. The reason is that myth-making, exploiting the theme of tragedy, is acquiring less and less harmless forms.

Quite popular, for example, is the version today, according to which the death of the Dyatlovites was a ritual murder committed by local Mansi under the leadership of shamans. They say that the aggressive forest tribe brutally dealt with the aliens who invaded the forbidden sacred territory. And the tribune for the blood libel singers is provided not by some marginal nationalist sites, but by federal TV channels in their prime time.

The dead have no shame

But, perhaps, the main victim of the conspiracy theology of "woodpecker" should be considered one of the Dyatlovites themselves - Semyon Zolotarev. More precisely, not Semyon himself, the dead, as you know, do not have shame, but his relatives.

One can imagine with what feelings they listen today to the nonsense that is pouring from screens today under the guise of "historical research." Here is a relatively fresh statement of another "woodpecker", sounded in the studio of one of the country's leading TV channels:

“My opinion is that Zolotarev was taken prisoner during the war. He was quickly "processed" ... And that's it, then he became a traitor ... As a traitor he worked for foreign intelligence. "

At the same time, absolutely none! - there are no grounds for such fabrications. All these "researchers" rely on: a) 37-year-old Semyon was much older than the rest of the Dyatlovites; b) unlike them, he had no relation to the Ural Polytechnic; c) was at war. By the way, he not only was, but fought heroically, as evidenced by the Order of the Red Star, the Medal For Courage, and other military awards. But for conspiracy theorists, Zolotarev's military past is only evidence. The logic is "iron": since I was at the front, it means that I betrayed my homeland.

Semyon Zolotarev

According to this, if I may say so, version, the overseas owners instructed Zolotarev to photograph the "fireballs" that appeared in the Ural sky - the result of bold experiments by Soviet scientists to create "plasmoids". It was for this purpose that Zolotarev asked for a campaign. But there he was exposed and, in order to avoid publicity, killed witnesses of his espionage activities. And so as not to look, he threw someone similar to him on the scene.

A variant of nonsense: Zolotarev was not an agent of foreign intelligence, but the KGB. And he did not sniff out, but, on the contrary, defended state secrets. That is why he eliminated the Dyatlovites who witnessed something terribly secret. Well, they buried, again, someone else.

In the end, Zolotarev's relatives, supported by the capital's press, insisted on the exhumation of his remains, resting at the Ivanovo cemetery in Yekaterinburg. The exhumation took place in April last year. The first studies were conducted by Sergey Nikitin, an expert from the Bureau of Forensic Medicine of the Moscow City Health Department, one of the most authoritative Russian specialists in personal identification. Using the method of photomixing, Sergei Alekseevich made a categorical conclusion: the remains belong to Semyon Zolotarev.

However, then two genetic examinations were carried out, during which the DNA of a person buried in the Ivanovskoye cemetery was compared with the gene code of Semyon Zolotarev's closest relatives - the children of his own sister. The first such study refuted the result obtained by Nikitin, excluding maternal kinship, and the second, on the contrary, confirmed (blood relatives). Now, as far as we know, another genetic study is being prepared to give a final answer about the identity of the remains.

Goldmine

Sergei Nikitin remains fully confident in his conclusion a year ago. “The remains really belong to Semyon Zolotarev,” Sergei Alekseevich told the MK columnist. “The injuries found exactly correspond to the description of the injuries, which was made in 1959 by the forensic expert Boris Vozrozhdenny.”

Nikitin explains the discrepancy in the results of geneticists by the fact that "the first genetic examination was carried out by an amateur, and the second by a professional." And for the future, he advises customers "to trust old experts and not waste money."

The expert considers the certificate drawn up in the TFR to be a "full-fledged and serious" document and agrees with its authors in almost everything. The only amendment he proposed concerns the mechanism of injury found at Dubinina, Zolotarev and Thibault-Brignoles: “After carefully reviewing all the documents, I believe that the following mechanism of the incident is most likely: they fell into the stream, most likely, not at the same time.

The first to fall was Dubinina (multiple bilateral fractures of the ribs), Zolotarev fell on her (multiple fractures of the ribs on the right side), Kolevatov fell on him (without injuries), next to him fell and hit his head on a Thibault-Brignoles stone (depressed fracture of the skull). The damage at Zolotarev, which I saw personally, and the damage to the rest of the listed tourists, described by Boris Vozrozhdenny, correspond to these conditions in the mechanism of their formation. "

The version defended by some researchers, according to which the injuries were received by the Dyatlovites at the time of the descent of the snow board, in the tent itself, Nikitin considers improbable - both in terms of the formation of injuries and taking into account their consequences. The injured - at least Dubinina and Thibault-Brignoles - could not have climbed down the mountain on their own. In addition, the injuries received did not leave them much time to live. According to Nikitin, they could live for half an hour, at most an hour.

For the sake of fairness, it should be noted that the position of the supporters of the “avalanche” version of injury also looks quite reasoned.

However, this is already, in fact, disputes between like-minded people. Both those and others agree on the main thing: the trigger mechanism of the tragedy was a snowfall. Well, as for the details, let's hope that the prosecutor's office will clarify them.

There are good chances that the final picture will turn out to be quite voluminous and clear. However, the likelihood that the results of the check will satisfy "caring residents of Russia" is practically zero. Neither the numerous tribe of "woodpeckers" are interested in closing the topic, for many of whom myth-making has already become a way of earning money, nor the regional elite: "the unsolved mystery of the Dyatlov Pass" attracts tourists no worse than the Loch Ness monster. Not a federal telepropaganda machine.

For the latter, the Dyatlov theme is a gold mine, the Klondike, "Viagra" for TV ratings and a means of entertaining idle minds. No, theoretically it is possible, of course, to engage the public by unraveling the riddles associated, say, with the murder of Nemtsov or the terrorist attack in Beslan, recall the story of the "Ryazan sugar", which is also very mysterious and interesting. But as one high-ranking character of the Strugatsky brothers asserted: “The people do not need unhealthy sensations. The people need healthy sensations. " Let us be healthy and unharmed.

The authors are sincerely grateful for the cooperation and information provided to the Public Fund for the Memory of the "Dyatlov Group" and personally to Yuri Kuntsevich, as well as Vladimir Askinadzi, Vladimir Borzenkov, Natalya Varsegova, Anna Kiryanova and Yekaterinburg specialists in photo processing.

INTRODUCTION .

In the early morning of February 2, 1959, on the slope of Mount Kholatchakhl in the vicinity of Mount Otorten in the Northern Urals, dramatic events took place that led to the death of a group of tourists from Sverdlovsk led by a 23-year-old student of the Ural Polytechnic Institute Igor Dyatlov.

Many circumstances of this tragedy have not yet received a satisfactory explanation, giving rise to many rumors, conjectures, which gradually grew into legends and myths, based on which several books have been written and a number of feature films have been shot. We think we have succeeded restore the true development of these events, which puts an end to this protracted history. Our version is based on strictly documentary sources, namely, on the materials of the Criminal Case, the history of the death and searches of Dyatlovtsy, as well as on some everyday and tourist experience. We offer this version to the attention of all interested persons and organizations, insisting on its reliability, but not claiming a new coincidence in details.

PREHISTORY

Before arriving at the place of a cold overnight stay on the slope of Mount Kholatchakhl on the night of February 1 to 2, 1959, a number of events took place with Dyatlov's group.

So, the very idea of \u200b\u200bthis hike III, the highest category of difficulty, for Igor Dyatlov arose a long time ago and took shape in December 1958, as told by Igor's senior comrades in tourism. *

The composition of the participants in the planned hike changed in the course of its preparation, reaching up to 13 people, but the backbone of the group, consisting of students and graduates of UPI, who have experience in hiking, including joint ones, remained unchanged. It included - Igor Dyatlov - 23-year-old leader of the campaign, 20-year-old Lyudmila Dubinina - caretaker, Yuri Doroshenko - 21 years old, 22-year-old Alexander Kolevatov, Zinaida Kolmogorova - 22 years old, 23-year-old Georgy Krivonischenko , 22-year-old Rustem Slobodin, Nikolay Thibault - 23 years old, 22-year-old Yuri Yudin. Two days before the trip, the group was joined by 37-year-old Semyon Zolotarev, a veteran of the Great Patriotic War, a front-line soldier who graduated from the Institute of Physical Education, and a professional tourism instructor.

At the beginning, the campaign went according to plan, with the exception of one circumstance: on January 28, Yuri Yudin left the route due to illness. The group made the further journey with nine. Until January 31, the hike, according to the general diary of the hike, the diaries of individual participants, photos given in the Case, went well: difficulties were surmountable, and new places gave young people new impressions. On January 31, Dyatlov's group made an attempt to overcome the pass separating the valleys of the Auspiya and Lozva rivers, however, encountering a strong wind at a low temperature (about -18), they were forced to retreat to spend the night in the forested part of the Auspiya river valley. On the morning of February 1, the group got up late, left some of the food and belongings in a specially equipped storage shed (it took a lot of time), had lunch and at about 3 pm on February 1 went on the route. In the materials on the termination of the Criminal Case, expressing, apparently, the collective opinion of the investigation and the interviewed experts, it is said that such a late departure on the route was the first the mistake of Igor Dyatlov... At the beginning, the group most likely followed its old trail, and then continued towards Mount Otorten and at about 5 pm set off for a cold night on the slope of Mount Holatchakhl.

To facilitate the perception of information, we present a remarkably composed diagram of the place of events, given by Vadim Chernobrov (Ill. 1).

Fig. 1. Scheme of the place of events.

In the materials of the criminal case it is said that Dyatlov “did not come where he wanted”, making a mistake in the direction and taking much more to the left than was required to pass to the pass between heights 1096 and 663. This, according to the authors of the Case, was the second mistake of Igor Dyatlov.

We do not agree with the version of the investigation and believe that Igor Dyatlov stopped the group not by mistake, by accident, but SPECIALLY in the place previously outlined in the previous passage.

Our opinion is not alone - this was also stated during the investigation by an experienced tourist student - Sogrin, who was part of one of the search rescue groups that found Igor Dyatlov's tent. The modern researcher Borzenkov also speaks about the planned stopover in the book “Dyatlov Pass. Research and materials ”, Yekaterinburg 2016, p. 138. What prompted Igor Dyatlov to do this?

COLD Overnight.

Arriving as we believe , to the point previously marked by Dyatlov, the group started setting up the tent, according to all the "tourist and mountaineering rules." The issue of a cold overnight stay baffles the most experienced specialists and is one of the main mysteries of the tragic trip. Many all sorts of versions are put forward, up to the absurd, they say it was done for "training".

Only we managed to find a convincing version.

The question arises whether the participants in the campaign knew that Dyatlov plans cold sleepover. We think they didn’t know *, but didn’t contradict them, knowing about the difficult temper of their leader and forgiving him in advance about the previous campaigns and stories about them.

* This is indicated by the fact that the fire accessories (ax, saw and stove) were not left in place of the storage shed; moreover, even a dry block was prepared for kindling.

Taking part in the general work on the arrangement of an overnight stay, only one person expressed his protest, namely, a professional tourism instructor, 37 - year old Semyon Zolotarev, who went through the war. This protest was expressed in a very peculiar form, testifying to the high intellectual abilities of his applicant. Semyon Zolotarev created a very remarkable document, namely Battle sheet number 1 "Evening Otorten ".

We consider the Battle leaflet No. 1 "Evening Otorten" as the key to solving the tragedy.

The name itself says about the authorship of Zolotarev “ Combat leaf ". Semyon Zolotarev was the only veteran of the Great Patriotic War among the participants of the campaign, and a very deserved one, having four military awards, including the medal "For Courage". In addition, according to the tourist Axelrod, reflected in the Case, the handwriting of the handwritten "Evening Otorten" coincides with that of Zolotarev. So, at the beginning "Battle leaf", it is said that "according to the latest data of science snowmen live in the vicinity of Mount Otorten. "

It must be said that at that time the whole world was gripped by the fever of the search for Bigfoot, which still does not fade away. Such searches were carried out in the Soviet Union as well. We think that Igor Dyatlov was aware of this "problem" and dreamed of meeting Bigfoot and for the first time in the world and take a picture of it. From the materials of the Case, it is known that Igor Dyatlov in Vizhay met with old hunters, consulted with them on the upcoming campaign, perhaps it was also about the Bigfoot. Of course, experienced hunters * told the “young” the whole “truth” about Bigfoot, where he lives, what his behavior is, what he loves.

* So in the case, there is a testimony of Chargin 85 years old, that in Vizhay a group of tourists from Dyatlovites turned to him as a hunter.

Of course, all that was said was in the spirit of traditional hunting tales, but Igor Dyatlov believed what was said and decided that the outskirts of Otorten were just an ideal place for Bigfoot to live, and there was only one thing to do - to get up for a cold night, exactly cold, since the Bigfoot loves the cold and out of curiosity he himself will approach the tent. The place for a possible overnight stay was chosen by Igor in the previous passage on January 31, 1959, when the group actually reached the pass separating the Auspiya and Lozva river basins.

A photo of this moment has survived, which allowed Borzenkov to accurately determine this point on the map. The picture shows that, obviously, Igor Dyatlov and Semyon Zolotarev are arguing very toughly about the further route. Obviously, Zolotarev expresses against logically difficult to explain Dyatlov's decision to go back to Auspiya and offers to "take the pass", which was a matter of about 30 minutes and go down for the night in the Lozva river basin. Note that in this case, the group would have got up for the night just approximately in the area of \u200b\u200bthat same unfortunate cedar.

Everything becomes logically explainable if we assume that already at that moment Dyatlov was planning a cold overnight stay, just on the slope of mountain 1096 *, which, if spent overnight in the Lozva basin, would be on the sidelines.

* This mountain, called in the Mansi language Kholatchakhl mountain, is translated as “ Mountain of 9 Dead "... Mansi consider this place "unclean" and bypass it. So from the Case, according to the testimony of a student Slabtsov, who found a tent, the Mansi guide who accompanied them flatly refused to go to this mountain. We think that Dyatlov decided if it is impossible, then it is necessary - to prove to everyone that it is possible and he is not afraid of anything, and he also thought that if they say - it is impossible, then it means that exactly here the notorious Bigfoot lives.

So, at about 5 pm on February 1, Igor Dyatlov gives unexpectedthe team, the half-day resting group, to embark on a cold night, explaining the reasons for this decision by the scientific task of finding the Bigfoot. The group, with the exception of Semyon Zolotarev, reacted calmly to this decision. For the time remaining before sleep, Semyon Zolotarev made his famous "Evening Otorten", which is actually a satirical work, sharply critical the established orders in the group.

In our opinion, there is a well-founded point of view on the further tactics of Igor Dyatlov. According to the experienced tourist Axelrod, who knew Igor Dyatlov well from joint hikes, Dyatlov planned to raise the group at dark, at about 6 o'clock in the morning, then go to the assault on Mount Otorten. This is most likely what happened. The group was preparing to dress (more precisely, to put on shoes, since people slept in clothes), while having breakfast with breadcrumbs and bacon. According to the numerous testimonies of the participants in the rescue work, crackers were scattered throughout the tent; they fell out of the crumpled blankets along with pieces of bacon. The situation was calm, no one except Dyatlov was seriously upset that Bigfoot did not come and that, in fact, the group suffered such significant inconveniences in vain.

Only Semyon Zolotarev, who was located at the very entrance to the tent, was seriously outraged by what had happened. His discontent was fueled by the following circumstance. The fact is that on February 2, Semyon had a birthday. And it looks like he already began to "celebrate" him with alcohol from the night, and it seems onesince according to the testimony of doctor Vozrozhdenny, alcohol was not found in the body of the first 5 tourists found. This is reflected in the official documents (in the Acts) given in the Case.

About a feast with chopped bacon and empty flask with zthe apache of vodka or alcohol at the entrance to the tent where Semyon Zolotarev was located, the prosecutor of Indelya Tempalov directly points out in the Case. A large flask of alcohol was confiscated from the discovered tent by student Boris Slobtsov. This alcohol, according to the testimony of a participant in the events of a student, Brusnitsyn, was immediately drunk by the members of the search group who found the tent. That is, in addition to the flask with alcohol there was a flask with the same drink in the tent. We think that we are talking about alcohol, not vodka.

Warmed up with alcohol, Zolotarev, dissatisfied with the cold and hungry overnight stay, went out of the tent to the toilet (a trail of urine remained at the tent) and outside demanded an analysis of Dyatlov's mistakes. Most likely, the amount of alcohol drunk was so significant that Zolotarev turned out to be very drunk and began to behave aggressively. Someone had to come out of the tent to this noise. At first glance, it should have been the leader of the campaign, Igor Dyatlov, but we think that he was not the one who came to the conversation. Dyatlov was located at the farthest end of the tent, it was inconvenient for him to climb through everyone and, most importantly, Dyatlov was significantly inferior in his physical data to Semyon Zolotarev. We believe that Semyon's demand came out tall (180 cm) and physically strong Yuri Doroshenko. This is also supported by the fact that ice axfound at the tent belonged to Yuri Doroshenko. So, in the materials of the Case, there was a record made by his hand "go to the trade union committee, take yourice ax ". Thus, Yuri Doroshenko, atthe only one from the whole group as it turned out later, it was time to put on your shoes. The footprint of the only man in the boots was documented in the Act by Prosecutor Tempalov.

Data on the presence or absence of alcohol in the body of 4 people found later (in May), and, specifically, in Semyon Zolotarev's Acts of the Doctor of the Renaissance are absent, because bodies at the time of the study had already begun to decompose. That is, the answer to the question: "Was Semyon Zolotarev drunk or not?" There is no case in the materials.

So, Yuri Doroshenko, shod in ski boots, armed with an ice ax and taking Dyatlov's flashlight with him for illumination, because it was still dark (it was getting light at 8-9 o'clock in the morning, and the action took place at about 7 o'clock in the morning), he gets out of the tent. A short, harsh and unpleasant conversation took place between Zolotarev and Doroshenko. Obviously, Zolotarev expressed his opinion about Dyatlov and Dyatlovtsy.

From the point of view of Zolotarev, Dyatlov makes gross mistakes. The first of them was the Dyatlov's passage of the mouth of the Auspiya River. As a result, the group had to make a detour. It was incomprehensible for Zolotarev and the departure of the group on January 31 to the bed of the Auspiya river instead of going down to the Lozva channel and, finally, absurd, and, most importantly, ineffectual cold sleepover. Discontent, hidden by Zolotarev in the newspaper Vecherniy Otorten, poured out.

We think that Zolotarev proposed to remove Dyatlov from the post of the leader of the campaign, replacing him with someone else, meaning first of all himself. In what form Zolotarev suggested this to us now is difficult to say. It is clear that after the alcohol is drunk, the shape should be sharp, but the degree of sharpness depends on the person's specific reaction to alcohol. Zolotarev, who knew the war in all its manifestations, of course was mentally disturbed, and could simply be agitated to an alcoholic psychosis bordering on delirium. Judging by the fact that Doroshenko left his ice ax and flashlight and chose to hide in the tent, Zolotarev was very excited. The guys even blocked his way to the tent, throwing a stove, backpacks, food at the entrance. This circumstance, up to the term “barricade”, is repeatedly emphasized in the testimony of the participants in the rescue operation. Moreover, there was an ax at the entrance to the tent, absolutely superfluous in this place.

Obviously, the students decided to actively defend themselves.

Perhaps this circumstance infuriated the drunken Zolotarev even more (as in the tent in the tent at the entrance, the canopy of the sheet was literally torn apart). Most likely, all these obstacles only infuriated Zolotarev, who rushed to the tent to continue the showdown. And then Zolotarev remembered about the gap in the tent from the "mountain" side, which was repaired all together at the previous camp. And he decided to get inside the tent through this gap, using, so that he would not be hindered, "psychological weapons", as was done at the front.

Most likely he shouted something like "Throwing a grenade".

The fact is that the country in 1959 was still overflowing with weapons, in spite of all Government Decrees on their delivery. It was not a problem to get a grenade at that time, especially in Sverdlovsk, where weapons were brought for melting. So the threat was very real. And in general, it is very likely that this was not only an imitation of the threat.

MAYBE WAS A REAL COMBAT Grenade.

Apparently, this was what investigator Ivanov had in mind when he spoke of a certain piece of hardware that he had not investigated. The grenade could really come in handy on a hike, in particular, for jamming fish under the ice, as was done during the war, since part of the route passed along rivers. And, quite possibly, the front-line soldier Zolotarev, decided to grab such a "necessary" item on the campaign.

Zolotarev did not calculate the effect of his "weapon". The students took the threat seriously and in panic, making two notches in the tarpaulin, left the tent. This happened at about 7 am, as it was still dark, as evidenced by the flashlight in a lit condition, dropped by students and later found by search engines 100 meters from the tent down the slope.

Zolotarev walked around the tent and, continuing to imitate the threat, decided drunk to teach the "young". He lined up the people (as witnessed by all the people observing the tracks) and commanded "Down", giving the direction. He gave one blanket with him, they say, keep warm with one blanket, as in that Armenian riddle from "Evening Otorten". This is how the cold night of the Dyatlovites ended.

TRAGEDY IN THE URAL MOUNTAINS.

The people went downstairs, and Zolotarev climbed into the tent and apparently continued to drink, celebrating his birthday. The fact that someone remained in the tent is evidenced by a subtle observer student, Sorgin, whose testimony is given in the Case.

Zolotarev, settled down on two blankets. All the blankets in the tent were crumpled up, with the exception of two, on which they found skins from the loin that Zolotarev was eating. It was already daybreak, the wind rose, which passed through a breakthrough in one place of the tent and cutouts in another. Zolotarev closed the breakthrough with Dyatlov's fur jacket, and the cutouts had to be fought in a different way, since the initial attempt to plug the cutouts with things, following the example of the cut, failed (for example, according to Astenaki, several blankets and a quilted jacket were sticking out of the cutouts of the tent). Then Zolotarev decided to lower the far edge of the tent by cutting the pole - a ski pole.

The weight of the snow that fell (the fact that there was snow at night is evidenced by the fact that Dyatlov's flashlight lay on the tent on a layer of snow about 10 cm thick) the stick was rigidly fixed and it was not possible to pull it out immediately. The stick had to be cut with that long knife with which the fat was cut. The cut stick was pulled out, its parts were found cut from the top of the backpacks. The far edge of the tent settled down and closed the cutouts, and Zolotarev settled down at the front post of the tent and, apparently, fell asleep for a while, having finished his alcohol from a flask.

The group, meanwhile, continued to move down, in the direction indicated by Zolotarev. It was testified that the tracks were divided into two groups - to the left of 6 people, and to the right - two. Then the tracks converged. These bands apparently corresponded to the two cutouts through which people climbed out. The two on the right are Thibault and Dubinina, who were located closer to the exit. On the left are all the others.

One man walked in boots(Yuri Doroshenko, as we believe). Recall that this is documented, in the Case, recorded by the prosecutor Tempalov. It also says that there were traces eight,what documented confirms our version that one person remained in the tent.

It was getting light, it was difficult to walk because of the snow that fell and, of course, it was desperately cold, because the temperature was about -20 C with wind. At about 9 o'clock in the morning, a group of 8 tourists, already half-frozen, found themselves next to a tall cedar. The cedar was not chosen by chance as the point near which they decided to make a fire. In addition to the dry lower branches for the fire, which it was possible to "get" with the help of cuts, an "observation post" was equipped with great difficulty to keep an eye on the tent. For this, the Finnish Krivonischenko cut out several large branches obstructing the view. Below, under the cedar, with great difficulty they lit a small fire, which, according to the coinciding estimates of different observers, burned for 1.5-2 hours. If the cedar was at 9 in the morning, it took an hour to make a fire and plus two hours - it turns out that the fire went out around 12 noon.

Still taking Zolotarev's threat seriously, the group decided not to return to the tent for now, but to try to "hold out" by building some kind of shelter, at least from the wind, for example, in the form of a cave. It turned out to be possible to do this in a ravine, by a stream that flowed towards the Lozva River. For this shelter, 10-12 poles were cut. For what exactly the poles were supposed to serve is not clear, maybe they planned to build a "floor" from them, throwing spruce branches on top.

Zolotarev, meanwhile, "was resting" in the tent, forgetting himself in a disturbing drunken sleep. Waking up and getting a little sober, at about 10-11 o'clock, he saw that the situation was serious, the students did not return, which meant they were “in trouble” somewhere and realized that he had “gone too far”. He followed the tracks downward, realizing his guilt and already without weapons (the ice ax remained at the tent, the knife in the tent). True, it remains unclear where the grenade was, if in reality it was after all. At about 12 o'clock he approached the cedar. He walked dressed and in felt boots. The trail of one person in felt boots was recorded by the observer Axelrod 10-15 meters from the tent. He walked down to Lozva.

The question arises: “Why is it missing or not seen the ninth trace? " Here the point is most likely the following. Students descended at 7 o'clock in the morning, and Zolotarev at about 11. By this time, at dawn a strong wind arose, drifting snow, which partly blew away the snow that fell at night, and partly compacted it, pressed it to the ground. It turned out to be thinner, and most importantly, denserlayer of snow. In addition, felt boots are larger in area than boots, and even more so legs without shoes. The pressure from boots on the snow, per unit area, turns out to be several times less, therefore, the traces of the descending Zolotarev were hardly noticeable and were not recorded by observers.

The people at the cedar, meanwhile, met him in a critical situation. Half-frostbitten, unsuccessfully trying to take turns to warm up by the fire, bringing their frozen hands, feet and faces close to the fire. Apparently from this combination of frostbite and mild burns, an unusual color of the skin of red tones of the open parts of the body was observed in five tourists found in the first phase of the search.

People placed all the blame for what happened on Zolotarev, so his appearance did not bring relief, but served to further aggravate the situation. Moreover, the psyche of hungry and freezing people worked, of course, inadequately. Zolotarev's possible apologies, or vice versa, his command orders, obviously, were not accepted. Lynching began... We think that at first Thibault demanded to take off his boots as an initial measure of "retaliation" and then demanded to hand over the "Victory" watch, which reminded Zolotarev of his participation in the war, which was obviously a matter of his pride. This seemed to Zolotarev extremely offensive. In response, he hit Thibault with a camera, which, perhaps, he demanded to give. And again "I didn't calculate", obviously alcohol was still in the blood. Used the camera as sling *he punched Thibault's head, actually killed him.

* This is evidenced by the fact that the camera strap was wound around Zolotarev's arm.

In the conclusion of Doctor Vozrozhdenny it is said that Thibault's skull is deformed in a rectangular area measuring 7x9 cm, which approximately corresponds to the size of the camera, and the torn hole in the center of the rectangle is 3x3.5x2 cm. This approximately corresponds to the size of the protruding lens. The camera, according to numerous witnesses, was found on the body of Zolotarev. A photo has survived.

After that, of course, all those present pounced on Zolotarev. Someone held hands, and Doroshenko, the only one in boots, kicked in the chest in the ribs. Zolotarev defended himself desperately, hit Slobodin so that his skull cracked, and when Zolotarev was immobilized by collective efforts, he began to fight with his teeth, biting off the tip of Krivonischenko's nose. So, apparently, they taught in frontline intelligence, where, according to some information, Zolotarev served.

During this fight Lyudmila Dubinina for some reason was ranked among the "supporters" of Zolotarev... Perhaps at the beginning of the fight she sharply objected to lynching, and when Zolotarev actually killed Thibault, she fell into "disgrace". But, most likely, the rage of those present turned to Dubinina for the following reason. Everyone understood that the beginning of the tragedy, its trigger point, was the intake of alcohol by Zolotarev. The case contains the testimony of Yuri Yudin that, in his opinion, one of the main shortcomings in the organization of Dyatlov's campaign was no alcohol, which, it was he, Yudin, who did not manage to get in Sverdlovsk, but, as we already know, there was still alcohol in the group... It means that the alcohol was bought on the way to Vizhay, in Indela, or, most likely, at the last moment before starting the route from the loggers in the 41st forest area. Since Yudin did not know about the presence of alcohol, then, obviously, this was kept secret. Dyatlov decided to use alcohol under some extraordinary circumstances - such as the storming of Mount Otorten, when the forces were running out, or to mark the successful end of the campaign. But the manager and accountant Dubinina could not be unaware of the presence of alcohol in the group, since it was she who allocated public money to Dyatlov to buy alcohol on the road. People or Dyatlov personally decided that it was she about this blabbed out Zolotarev, who slept nearby and with whom she willingly communicated (photos preserved). In general, Dubinina actually received the same, even more severe injuries than Zolotarev (10 ribs were broken at Dubinina, 5 at Zolotarev). In addition, her "chatty" tongue was ripped out..

Considering that the "opponents" are dead, one of the Dyatlovites, fearing responsibility, squeezed out their eyes, tk. there was and still is a belief that the image of a murderer remains in the pupil of a victim of a violent death. This version is supported by the fact that Thibault, who was mortally wounded by Zolotarev, had his eyes intact.

Let's not forget that people acted on the verge of life and death, in a state of extreme excitement of affect, when animal instincts completely turn off acquired human qualities. Yuri Doroshenko was found with frozen foam at his mouth, which confirms our version of his extreme degree of arousal, which reached rabies.

It is very likely that Lyudmila Dubinina suffered without guilt. The fact is that with almost 100 percent probability Semyon Zolotarev was an alcoholic, like many of the direct participants in the hostilities in Velikaya World War II 1941-1945. A fatal role here was played by the "People's Commissars" 100 grams of vodka, which were given out at the front every day during hostilities. Any narcologist will say that if this continues for more than six months, then inevitably there is a dependence of varying degrees of severity, depending on the physiology of a particular person. The only way to avoid the disease was to abandon the "People's Commissars", which, of course, a rare Russian man can do. So Semyon Zolotarev was hardly such an exception. An indirect confirmation of this is an episode on the train en route from Sverdlovsk, described in the diary of one of the participants in the campaign, which is given in Dele. A “young alcoholic” turned to the tourists and demanded to return a bottle of vodka, which, in his opinion, was stolen by one of them. The incident was hushed up, but most likely Dyatlov "figured out" Zolotarev and when buying alcohol strictly forbade Lyudmila Dubinina to talk about it to Zolotarev. Since Zolotarev nevertheless took possession of the Dyatlov alcohol, and then all the others decided that the manager Dubinin was to blame for this, who let slip, blabbed out... Most likely it was not. Students in their youth did not know that alcoholics develop a supernatural "sixth" sense of alcohol and they successfully and unmistakably find it in any conditions. Just by intuition. So Dubinina, most likely, had nothing to do with it.

The described bloody tragedy took place at about 12 noon on February 2, 1959, next to the ravine where the shelter was being prepared.

This time at 12 noon is determined as follows. As we already wrote, the tourists in panic left the tent through the cutouts at about 7 a.m. on February 2, 1959. Distance to the cedar is 1.5-2 km. Taking into account the "nakedness" and "barefoot" and the difficulties of orientation, the difficulty of orientation in the dark and at dawn, the group reached the cedar in an hour and a half or two. It turns out 8.5-9 in the morning. Dawn. Another hour to prepare firewood, cut out branches for the observation post, prepare poles for flooring. It turns out that the fire was kindled at about 10 o'clock in the morning. According to numerous testimonies of search engines, the fire burned for 1.5-2 hours. It turns out that the fire went out when the group went to clarify relations with Zolotarev to the ravine, i.e. 11.30 - 12 noon. So it comes out at about 12 noon. After the fight, having lowered the bodies of the dead into the cave (dropping them), a group of 6 people returned to the cedar.

And the fact that a fight took place near a ravine is proved by the fact that, according to the expert opinion of Doctor Vozrozhdenny, thibault himself could not move after the impact... They could only carry it. And even 70 meters from the cedar to the ravine could be carried by the perishing, semi-frostbitten people clearly beyond my powers.

Those who retained the strength of the Woodpeckers, Slobodin, and Kolmogorov rushed to the tent, the path to which was now free. Weakened in the fight, Doroshenko, fragile Krivonischenko and Kolevatov remained at the cedar and tried to re-light the fire near the cedar, which had extinguished during the fight in the ravine. So, Doroshenko was found falling on dry branches, which he obviously carried to the fire. But it seems that they failed to re-light the fire. After a while, perhaps quite a short time, Doroshenko and Krivonischenko froze to death. Kolevatov lived longer than them, and finding that his comrades were dead, and the fire could not be re-lit, he decided to meet his fate in the cave, thinking that someone from those who were in it might still be alive. He cut off a part of the warm clothes of his dead comrades with a Finn and carried them to the "hole in the ravine" where the rest were. He also took off the boots from Yuri Doroshenko, but apparently decided that they would hardly be useful and threw them into the ravine. The boots were never found, as well as a number of other things of the Dyatlovites, which is reflected in the Case. In the cave Kolevatov, Thibault,

Dubinina and Zolotarev met their death.

Igor Dyatlov, Rustem Slobodin and Zinaida Kolmogorova met their death on the difficult path to the tent, fighting for their lives to the last. It happened around 13 noon on February 2, 1959.

The time of death of the group, according to our version, it is 12-13 o'clock in the afternoon, coincides with the assessment of the remarkable forensic scientist Doctor Vozrozhdenny, according to which the death of all victims occurred 6-8 hours after the last meal. And this reception was breakfast after a cold night at about 6 am. 6-8 hours later gives 12-14 hours of the day, which almost exactly coincides with the time we specified.

A TRAGIC RELEASE HAS COME.

CONCLUSION .

It is difficult to find the right and the wrong in this story. Sorry for everyone. The greatest blame, as it sounded in the materials of the Case, lies with the head of the UPI Gordo sports club, it was he who had to check the psychological stability of the group and only after that give the go-ahead. I feel sorry for the perky Zina Kolmogorova, who loved life so much, the romantic Luda Dubinin who dreamed of love, the foppish handsome Kolya Thibault, the fragile Georgy Krivonischenko with the soul of a musician, the faithful friend Sasha Kolevatov, the home boy of the mischievous Rustem Slobodin with his sharp, strong ideas Doroshenko. It is a pity for the talented radio engineer, but the naive and narrow-minded person and the useless leader of the campaign of the ambitious Igor Dyatlov. It is a pity for the well-deserved front-line soldier, intelligence officer Semyon Zolotarev, who did not find the right ways for the campaign to go as he probably wanted, as best as possible.

In principle, we agree with the conclusions of the investigation that “the group faced natural forces, which they were unable to overcome”. Only we believe that these natural forces were not external, but internal... Some could not cope with their ambitions, Zolotarev did not make a psychological discount for the young age of the participants in the campaign and its leader. And of course, a huge role was played by the violation of "Prohibition" during the campaign, which, obviously, was officially acting among UPI students.

We believe that the investigation eventually came to a version close to the one we voiced. This is indicated by the fact that Semyon Zolotarev was buried separately from the main group of Dyatlovites. But, to publicly voice this version in 1959, the authorities considered it undesirable for political reasons. So, according to the memoirs of investigator Ivanov, "In the Urals, probably, there is no person who in those days did not talk about this tragedy" (see book "Dyatlov's Pass" p. 247). Therefore, the investigation was limited to an abstract formulation of the cause of the death of the group, given above. Moreover, we believe that the materials of the Case contain indirect confirmation of the version of the presence of a combat grenade or grenades from one of the participants in the campaign. So in the Acts of the Doctor of the Renaissance it is said that multiple fractures of the ribs at Zolotarev and Dubinina could result from the action air blast, which just generates a grenade explosion. In addition, the prosecutor-criminalist, Ivanov, who conducted the investigation, as we have already written about this, spoke of the "lack of investigation" of some "piece of iron" found. Most likely we are talking about the Zolotarev grenade, which could be anywhere from the tent to the ravine. It is obvious that the people conducting the investigation exchanged information and, possibly, the "grenade" version reached the doctor of the Renaissance.

We also found direct evidence that already at the beginning of March, that is, in the initial phase of the search, the explosion version was considered. So the investigator Ivanov writes in his memoirs: “There were no traces of the explosion wave. Maslennikov and I carefully considered this "(see in the book" Dyatlov Pass "article Ivanov LN" memoirs from the family archive "p. 255).

This means that there were grounds for searching for traces of the explosion, that is, it is possible that the grenade was still found by sappers. Since in the memoirs we are talking about Maslennikov, this determines the time - the beginning of March, so later Maslennikov left for Sverdlovsk.

This evidence very significant, especially if we recall that at that time the “Mansi version” was the main one, that is, the local residents of Mansi were involved in the tragedy. The Mansi version fell apart completely by the end of March 1959.

The fact that by the time the bodies of the last four tourists were discovered in early May the investigation had come to certain conclusions is evidenced by the complete indifference of Prosecutor Ivanov, who was present during the excavation of the bodies. The head of the last group of search engines, Askinadzi, speaks about this in his memoirs. So, most likely, the grenade was found not near the cave, but somewhere on the segment from the tent to the cedar in February – March, when a group of sappers with mine detectors was working there. That is, by May, by the time the bodies of the last four victims were found, the criminal prosecutor Ivanov, who was conducting the investigation, was more or less clear.

Obviously that this tragic incident should serve as a lesson for tourists of all generations.

And for this, the activities of the Dyatlov Foundation should be continued, as we believe.

ADDITION. ABOUT FIRE BALLS.

The monster is blown away, mischievous, huge, staggering and barking

It is not by chance that we have quoted this epigraph from the wonderful story of the enlightener A.N. Radishchev "Travel from St. Petersburg to Moscow". This epigraph is about the state. So how "evil" was the Soviet state in 1959 and how did it "bark" at tourists?

That's how. Organized a tourist section at the institute, where everyone studied for free and received a scholarship. Then this "evil" allocated money in the amount of 1,300 rubles for the hike of its students, gave them free use of the most expensive equipment during the hike - a tent, skis, boots, wind jackets, sweaters. It helped with the planning of the trip, the development of the route. And, she even arranged a paid business trip for the leader of the campaign, Igor Dyatlov. The height of cynicism in our opinion. This is how our country, in which we all grew up, “barked” at tourists.

When it became clear that something unforeseen had happened to the students, they immediately organized a costly and well-organized rescue and search operation involving aviation, military personnel, athletes, other tourists, as well as the local population of Mansi, who showed themselves from the best side.

But what about the famous FIRE BALLS? Of which the tourists were allegedly so scared that they barricaded the entrance to the tent, and then cut it open in order to urgently get out of it?

We also found an answer to this question.

We were greatly helped to find this answer by the images that a group of researchers from Yekaterinburg obtained using a unique technique by processing a film from a camera by Semyon Zolotarev. While recognizing the significant importance of this work, we would like to draw attention to the following easily verifiable and obvious facts.

It is enough just to rotate the resulting images to see that they are not depicted at all. mythical "Balls of fire", and real and quite understandable plots.

So if you rotate one of the images from the book "Dyatlov Pass" and called "Mushroom" by the authors by 180 degrees, then we can easily see the dead face of one of the Dyatlovites who was found last, namely Alexander Kolevatov. It was he who, according to eyewitnesses, was found with his tongue sticking out, which is easily "read" in the photo. From this fact, it is obvious that Zolotarev's film, after the frames he filmed during the campaign, filmed by the Askinadzi search engine group.

Fig. 3. "Mysterious" photo # 7 *. Kolevatov's face.

This is the object "Mushroom" in Yakimenko's terminology.

* Photos 6,7 are given in the article by Valentin Yakimenko "Films of the Dyatlovites": Searches, finds and new mysteries "in the book" Dyatlov Pass "p.424. from the same place the numbering of pictures. This position is additionally proved by this frame named by the authors "Lynx".

Expand it 90 degrees clockwise. In the center of the frame, the face of a person from the Askinadzi search party is clearly visible. Here is a photo from his archive.

Fig. 4 Askinadzi's group. By this point people already knewwhere the bodies are and made a special dam - a trap "in the photo" to detain them in the event of a sudden flash flood. Photo from late April - early May 1959.

Fig. 5 "Mysterious" photo # 6 (Lynx object) in Yakimenko's terminology and an enlarged image of the search engine.

We see that, in the center of the frame, from Zolotarev's film, a person from the Askinadzi group.

We think that this person did not happen to be in the center frame. Perhaps it was he who played the key, main, central role in the search - figured out where the bodies of the last Dyatlovites are. This is evidenced by the fact that in the group photo of the search engines he feels himself a winner and is above everyone else.

We believe that and all other pictures given in Yakimenko's article have a similar purely earthly origin.

So, thanks to the joint efforts of specialists from Yekaterinburg, first of all, Valentin Yakimenko and ours, the mystery of the "fireballs" was solved by itself.

It just never existed.

As well as the "fireballs" themselves in the vicinity of Mount Otorten on the night of 1 to 2 February 1959.

We respectfully present our work to all interested persons and organizations.

Sergey Goldin, analyst, independent expert.

Yuri Ransmi, Research Engineer, Image Analysis Specialist.

Why is this case haunted?
The main thing is that after reading thousands of articles and watching videos, I understand that all researchers are starting their investigation from someone's invented version of the development of events at the Dyatlov Pass.

I am confused by the cliches that seem to be embedded in the minds of researchers.

The stamp "The tent was cut from the inside by tourists when something scared them."
Anyone who wanted to make the tent brighter could cut the tent. Anyone could cut, after the death of tourists.
Can you imagine a situation when a truck with cognac suddenly crashes near your house? Anyone brave will want to take a bottle for themselves. And here is the same situation. The tourists died "near the Muncie house." Three weeks will pass before the tent is officially found. During this time, "both a beetle and a toad" could visit the site of the tragedy.
Not all people are afraid of the dead. There could be different chains of footprints, why are these footprints of tourists? Why is it believed that the tracks appeared at the same time?

The stamp "The tourists did not lose anything." Judging by the way the investigation was conducted, no one really knew what things the tourists had. Yudin identified things, identification
was carried out negligently. I think that groceries and shoes were stolen, and then to convince people that nothing was stolen, I had to deliver groceries and look for the stolen shoes.

Stamp "Tourists are frozen in dynamic poses." Where do you see dynamic poses? Lying on your back? Lying on your side? One hugs the other? Tourists froze in more than strange positions. Two under the cedar - Krivonischenko and Doroshenko, someone shifted after they died. Note that the bodies were moved before they became numb. The body of Lyuda Dubinina could not move from the bodies of other tourists with whom she was found, thanks to the flow of water from the stream. The bodies of Kolevatov, Zolotarev, Thibault lay directly in the stream, in the stream of water and did not move anywhere because 4 meters of packed snow lay on top. The body of Lyuda Dubinina lay in accordance with the relief of the area on which it was. This could only happen if Luda was dying in this particular position, or if someone displaced the body when it was not yet frozen. Here is such a weirdness. The bodies were not numb, but they were carried, turned over, undressed. By the way, only Kolevatov and Zolotarev have a normal posture for freezing ones (one warms the other with his body) and it would be normal if they were not found in the stream. One researcher writes that tourists deliberately lay down in the stream to bask in the water, they say the water is warmer than the surrounding air. Sometimes I want to take researchers outside to get away from computers and get closer to reality.

The stamp "We walked from the tent to the cedar in socks, and then we made a flooring, kindled a fire." In general, it is unrealistic to walk in the snow in socks. Legs immediately begin to ache so that you want to get on all fours so as not to step on frozen feet. It is impossible to walk in the snow without shoes! IMPOSSIBLE! Moreover, it takes a long time to walk, make a fire, carry wounded comrades, make a flooring, try to return to the tent. Legs freeze immediately and hurt so much that it is IMPOSSIBLE to step on them! Go and walk in the snow, check it out! On the site of the Dyatlov Pass, I would organize a 1.5 km sock run for the researchers, and for those who return to the tent, I would issue the Order of Dyatlov and the Mountain of the Dead!

And a bunch of stamps "Nobody escaped from the camps" (well, nobody), "Not a single shot was fired", "The tent was set up according to all the rules" (only Yudin could tell whether it was set up according to all the rules), "At the scene of the tragedy there were no more people "(and who then left a flashlight on the slope of the tent after the tent was covered with snow, who left a trail of urine near the tent, where are the extra skis from)?
From article to article, researchers repeat these clichés like parrots.

It all happened on the night of February 2.
And how is this proven? A snapshot of where the tent is set up? The last entry in your diary? Nothing has proven this. Since the case was started on February 6, the accident could have occurred from the night of February 2 to the evening of February 5. And this is three whole days! During this time, one could fly to Moscow and return. We are persistently told about February 2. For what and who needs it? It is beneficial for someone that three days disappeared, the group's route disappeared during these days. So that a large number of search engines slowed down at the Dyatlov pass and did not go further. The picture of setting up the tent is extremely strange. The slope is completely different, there is much more snow, it is impossible to identify the people in the picture, and the tourists had nothing to dig such a big hole with, they did not have a single shovel.
They write that they dug the snow with skis. Do you remember these wooden skis, they could break, because the crust, in the place where the tent was set up, was hard.

The storehouse is also a big oddity, both the place and the way of its installation. Only a complete fool can bury food in the snow and get away from them for two days. In the snow, any animal will smell and unearth food items valuable for winter. And the Mansi hunters could find a storage shed and take precious products. The storehouse was made in a place where they were not going to return, the storehouse was made not before the ascent, but far from Mount Otorten, where they were going to climb. I am especially pleased with the 4kg cooked sausage found in the storage shed. Who needs to take boiled sausage on a hike? And if they did, they would eat it first.

The main thing is the last four of tourists, found with severe life-long injuries.
Three - Zolotarev, Kolevatov, Thibault, were found in the stream. These three lay when they died. And they should have been found on the floor. They could not spend the effort to make the flooring, but die in a stream in the snow. It means that someone came after their death (if the flooring was made by tourists), on February 6-7, removed the frozen bodies from the flooring, when they had not yet been covered with snow, and put these bodies in the stream. And who could it be if, according to the assurances of many researchers, there was no one on the pass except for a group of tourists? Then LYUDA Dubinina did it (For the fact that Zolotarev took off her jacket and hat, deprived of the last warm clothes)! Because only she is found in a dynamic pose! She killed everyone, put the last in a stream and died of grief, praying on a stone. And then a mouse came and bit off her tongue. Mouse, comrades, the reason for everything that happened! It's like a fairytale.

For those who think that tourists dug a den in the snow, not knowing that a stream flows under the den, there is one argument. It is necessary to answer the question, how did the tourists dig a den for four people if the skis were left under the tent? It is very important to look on the Internet how such dens are made (done for one person).

From the beginning of the opening of the case on February 6 until the discovery of the first corpses and the reopening of the case on February 26, 20 days of investigative actions about which we know nothing will pass. During this time, shoes will disappear from the corpses and will be transferred to the tent, the corpses will be transferred, shifted, turned out pockets, the clothes will be confused. An incomprehensible storage will appear, the products in which will be covered with cardboard, which no one in the group carried or took with them.

Who knew, but could not reveal to us - fools, the whole truth? And this is Lev Ivanov - the investigator in the case. Why did he write the article?
HE wrote an article and put the answer in plain sight! These are the words from the article.
“When we landed in the taiga, and then on skis climbed Mount OTORTEN, literally at the very top we found and dug up a tent of tourists covered with snow.” (From the article "The Secret of Fireballs" by Lev Ivanov, the investigator in the case of the death of the group).
What do you think Ivanov mistakenly named one mountain after another? Holatchahl confused with Otorten? Mechanically, as they now say about Tempalov's note, automatically changed the name, because I was thinking about one grief, but named another?
I will note that "literally at the very top", literally! Did you find a tent on the top of Mount Holatchakhl? At least? No, on the slope.

The actions and responses of the modern prosecutor's office are simply ridiculous! Nothing has changed in the minds of the prosecutor's office from the "Tsar Pea" to the present day. They say that Prosecutor Tempalov made a mistake with the date in the memo. And the criminal case was also started by mistake on a different date (February 6, and not 25-26, when the tent was found). And in this case, there are radiograms that contradict the general course of searches for the bodies of tourists.
This business is a matter of blunders and inconsistencies, or maybe very thoughtful work.
It is interesting that the tourists themselves were given the film to develop the photo. When I read about this for the first time, I was very surprised. I myself was engaged in photography and I know that in case of an unsuccessful development, the film can be spoiled, exposed. The film was placed in the tank and the solution was poured in complete darkness. Leave such important documents to chance. "What negligence!" - I thought then.

Let's say everything went on as usual. The tourists lost their minds and pitched a tent 1.5 km from their storage shed on the mountainside during a hurricane wind. Then they left the tent and all went down the slope, where they died from freezing.
Someone, an unknown person, made a statement to the police that he saw an abandoned tent and several corpses of tourists. According to the statement, the investigator had to check the information and make sure that all the tourists were killed or come to the rescue of those who survived. The police detachment went to the indicated place where he was convinced of the reliability of the information and had to carry out the initial investigative measures - an inspection of the scene. This squad finds a tent and the bodies of tourists. It's incredibly perfect! Hurricane weather continues, strong wind blows. The bodies of tourists are far from the tent. This detachment finds corpses, which then look for and cannot find groups of search detachments, for some reason drags the corpses of Krivonischenko and Doroshenko, and covers them with a blanket, shifts the corpses of the last four into the stream and removes shoes from the corpses of Dyatlov, Kolmogorova, Slobodin, then folds the shoes into the tent, cuts the ramp at the tent. And only later, when the relatives of the victims begin to "sound the alarm", they forget about the place where the bodies and the tent were found, and they search again, they make a false storage. How many incredible actions there are in the ordinary death of tourists from a hurricane and frost.

1.1. One trace of urine. “When investigating cases, there are no minor details: investigators have a motto: attention to detail! A natural trace was found near the tent that one man left it for a small need. Then this trace of bare feet is traced down into the valley. " (From Lev Ivanov's article "The Secret of Fireballs").
Many will be silent about this, as if they themselves have never seen the toilet. It is not customary to talk about it. And we'll talk. If you went on a long hike in winter with backpacks and a tent, then you do not need to explain how difficult it is to relieve yourself if there are two genders in the hike, when the girls go to the left and the boys to the right. In the conditions of a hike, when you need to pee, take off your backpack, skis, find a bush to hide behind, take off several layers of clothing and expose your butt to a 20-degree frost, it is impossible to relieve yourself during the hike itself, this can be done only during halt and parking. It is even more difficult when you want to "big", but there are no bushes and trees. Very soon tourists stop being shy during the hike. This happens in groups of athletes, when, for example, there is one dressing room and boys and girls must change at the same time.
In short, they came to the parking lot and immediately decided where the conditional toilet was. Trampled snow and here are nine traces of urine and nine "piles". And only then we climbed into the tent and began to get ready for bed. And to think that you can leave the tent one by one (climbing over the others), or one pee and no one else wanted, this is nonsense.
What follows from the fact that only one trace of urine was found? There was only one person in the tent.
I cannot link this conclusion to the whole story. Let's say Kolmogorova remained in the tent, and everyone, right after they set up the tent, went to the side of the forest to look for bushes to relieve themselves.
Or, the fact that the tourists did not put up a tent in this place, but someone else set it up there.

1.2. Skis under the tent.
I recommend everyone to go hiking in winter and try to put skis (9 pairs) under the tent. Very soon you will realize that the skis are hard and there is no heat from them, and they will also occupy an area equal to half of Dyatlov's long tent. And the other half? Skiing under the tent is kind of "crap". Skis are vital equipment. Without them, it is impossible to move on the snow. Skis must be protected and always on alert. For example, someone is going to go fetch firewood, and the skis are under the tent.
Output? The tent was put on the skis by someone who does not know how to take care of them during the hike, when you can only move on skis.
Wooden skis could break if stepped on unsuccessfully, especially the curved nose of the ski could break. I know this because as a child I often rode these very skis.

1.3. Cold overnight.
A cold night is an overnight stay in a tent at sub-zero temperatures (outside). It is very good if the tent can be heated with a stove on a cold night. A wood-fired stove is another "hemorrhoid". If the stove is heated, then it heats up very much. There is always the possibility of fire. A person on duty is needed to heat the stove. He must watch the stove, put firewood on, watch so that the coal does not fall out, so that the stove does not smoke. This is a complex process. As well as the installation of the stove, so the process of melting and stoking. It is impossible to light the stove with damp wood. There should always be a supply of dry firewood. In order to heat the whole night with wood, you need a lot of wood. They must be dry, otherwise the stove will smoke. It is impossible to sleep in a smoke-filled tent. After setting up the tent, you need to immediately put the stove, remove the pipe, melt it, and then climb into the tent.
Interestingly, the tent was set up on the last night, and the stove was not assembled for the firebox. Or maybe the one who set up the tent did not know how to put the stove correctly?
Can a person spend the night in a canvas tent at minus twenty without a stove? I think it must be a tempered northern man. To survive here special conditions are needed. For example - to spend only one night in such conditions.
And the question is, where to get dry firewood? You can get them from local people, or you can find sushnina (dry standing tree) in the forest. Cut down a tree, cut into logs, then split them with an ax into logs.
I think only in the most extreme case a tourist will set up a tent at a distance of one and a half kilometers from the nearest dry tree.

Now we are going on a hike with a gas stove and cans of gas. Even such a stove and cylinders have a weight, but this weight is incomparably lighter than a stove with wood. The gas oven is practically safe, no attendant is needed to watch.

1.4. Excess weight.
Hiking in winter, when you need to walk 300 km, even without luggage on a well-worn track and flat road, is difficult. Don't believe me? Walk at least 100 km and have a car driving behind you, which will save you if something happens. And then a hike with the summit and overnight in a tent. And now you need to not only move, but also carry your load. How much can a woman carry? We find the norm - 7 kg. If you start counting how much luggage weight fell on each tourist in the hike, you get large numbers (30kg). Only products were found in the storage shed weighing 55 kg. Add to them the weight of the tent, stove, ice ax, saws, and other equipment, add three liters of alcohol, felt boots, firewood for the stove. Add to this figure the weight of things, after Yudin leaves, and you will understand that this is a lot, almost prohibitively much, especially for women. Researchers often write that women were sad for an unknown reason on a hike. Here's the reason - too much load. It is not for nothing that locals and a cart with a horse help the Dyatlovites.

1.5. Why did Yudin leave?
And he realized that he could not carry 300 km of things that were loaded onto him. He was the wisest in this whole story. As soon as the horse turned back, he turned back too. I look at Yudin's smiling face in the last farewell photo and cannot believe that the person is very sick and has withdrawn from the race, citing illness. I watched the interview with Yudin and it was clear how carefully he thinks over his answers, how he avoids answering questions, how he is cunning in some places, how his eyes dart around and how restless he behaves. It may not mean anything, or maybe he knew something that he could not tell people.

1.6. Discipline.
Reading the diaries, I wondered how the discipline in Dyatlov's group was "lame". We got up late, got together for a long time, did stupid things, “dogged”. Responsibilities have not been assigned. Suffice it to mention that a quilted jacket burned down in one of the overnight stays, and the torn tent was repaired during the hike. With such discipline, in the conditions of a campaign of the third group of complexity, they would have died without any missiles, UFOs, evil military men, convicts, Mansi and other people.

1.7. From the new.
It turned out that on February 2, all the tourists of the group were alive, a guide with a horse was found who brought their luggage, and this fact was reported to the public! This fact suggests that the Dyatlovites most likely climbed Otorten. And it was necessary to look for artifacts on Mount Otorten and not on the Dyatlov Pass.
The researchers found the witness P.I. Salter, who said that there were 11 bodies that were brought from the pass almost simultaneously, they were very dirty. Just think, where did they find the mud when there is snow around? Falling into the mud in winter? Found a bunker, and there is dirt? Where is it wet and muddy in winter?
And absolutely latest news - another person is buried in Zolotarev's grave (which I doubt, such an important study was carried out too superficially and negligently).

Researchers often cite as an example, it seems, similar cases of the death of tourists, for example, the death of Korovina's group in the Khamar-Daban mountains. I think that the case of the death of the Dyatlov group differs in one significant detail. When the Dyatlovites went down to the cedar, they were able to kindle a fire. I believe that a fire is a very important condition for survival. In this case, someone could have died, but not the whole group. Korovina's group was younger, with less experience (children).

I think we will find out exactly how the tourists died. The resonance is very great. A large number of people started searching. Everything does not disappear and somewhere there is a documentary with the answer to all our questions. Nowadays, private people have a lot of different machinery and equipment. Many tourists and researchers follow the trail of Dyatlov's group.

Old.

This version arose as a result of many years of studying documents available on the Internet about the death of Igor Dyatlov's group, thanks to the tourist experience and overnight stays in a tent at subzero temperatures (from -5 to -15 degrees).
The case of the death of tourists in the area of \u200b\u200bMount Otorten started on February 6, 1959, how could this happen if the tent was found only on February 26? Very simple. Someone found the dead tourists and made a statement to the investigator. Who could it be? It could have been, probably, a hunter or one of the tourists, the one who survived.
It was not the bird on its tail that brought the news.
“I know that the bodies of the dead tourists are lying on Mount Otorten. - The man said.
- So you killed them. - The investigator answered. (A typical situation for Russia).
But what if four tourists went out to the people, reported the death of their comrades and died as a result of the work of a zealous investigator? Such cases are not rare in Russia.
Kill, as a result of investigative pressure, and then fell on supernatural forces. Remember the very good and revealing film "Cold Summer of 53"? It was a time when tens of thousands of criminals were released from the camps, and the main characters Kopalych and Luzga were serving their sentences - one as an "English spy", and the other for being surrounded and being held captive for only one day.
The interrogation of VA Popov, the head of the communications unit of the Vizhaisky forestry division, began on February 6, 1959: “The witness testified: in the second half of January 1959, in the village of Vizhay, I saw two groups of tourists who were heading for the Ural ridge area. There is a memo from the prosecutor of the city of Ivdel I.V. Tempalova dated February 15 "... upon the death of tourists, I was summoned and left for Sverdlovsk for 2-3 days" ...

And they found the dead tourists in the area of \u200b\u200bMount Otorten, and not in some other place, this is also clear from the title of the case. Then the usual investigation begins, during which it turns out that the tourists died strangely and the damage to the bodies does not confirm freezing. The death of tourists is decided to be classified, and the case is delayed. Ivdel prosecutor Vasily Tempalov and investigator Vladimir Korotaev concealed information about the death of the group.
And they delayed it in every possible way until May 26, 1959. This is how the case begins, which is being investigated until 2019 and so far there is no end in sight. First, the map of the group's route was withdrawn and it had to be restored (thanks to Rimma Kolevatova). It is foolish to think that Dyatlov did not provide the group's route to the UPI sports club.

Where would you go to look for the missing tourists of the Dyatlov group? Of course, Otorten was the main peak that tourists were going to conquer. How long could traces of the group stay there? Yes, not at all. There, in general, no traces could be preserved until February 26 (crust, wind and blizzard hid all traces). There could only be a bookmark left by the Dyatlovites.
To remove traces of the group's presence on Mount Otorten, it was necessary to remove the bookmark. One can only assume that the bookmark was and it was "Evening Otorten" - a combat leaflet written on February 1, 1959. Otherwise, why call that message written on a notebook sheet, the original or a copy of which for some reason has not been preserved?

I note that to this day, few people are looking for artifacts on Mount Otorten, because it is said clearly and definitely - the tent and the corpses of tourists were found in the area of \u200b\u200bthe Dyatlov Pass (the modern name). Slobtsov and Sharavin found the tent, they immediately realized that this was the tent of the Dyatlov group and that the tourists left it in a panic and ran down the slope. It was dark and the tourists left the tent, making cuts in the slope of the tent. They ran away, leaving warm clothes and shoes in the tent, they were so scared that they lost their minds. Where do such conclusions come from?
It is because of this stamp that many absurd versions were born.

We look at the map and see that there are several ways to go to Mount Otorten. One is to walk along Lozva, from it to turn to the Auspiya tributary and walk along the mountains, the other is to walk along Auspiya to Mount Holatchakhl, cross the Dyatlova pass to the 4th tributary of Lozva and along the Lozva tributary to Lake Luntkhusaptur. It is also interesting that from the second Northern one you can walk along Lozva directly to Otorten, without turning to Auspiya. Why do you need to walk along rivers (near rivers)? Because there is water and firewood for the stove and less wind, and warmer. The river is the road. And from the testimony of Anyamov it turns out that in February they saw traces of the group in the upper reaches of the Lozva River.
But Lozva was not an easy way. She was badly frozen and could have failed.

Some Dyatlovedy believe that the Dyatlovites slipped past the turn to Auspiya and walked for another two kilometers along Lozva, then returned and went along Auspiya (made a detour).
In Dyatlov's diary for January 31, it is written that on that day they made an attempt to climb Mount Holatchakhl (We were moving away from Auspiya, a gentle rise began, went beyond the border of the forest, the wind speed is similar to the air speed when the plane was lifting, very tired, went down to Auspiya and stopped at overnight). At the same time (most likely) the Dyatlovites realized that it was impossible to walk along the top of the mountains, and then they had to make the only correct decision - to return to Lozva and walk along it, as the locals advised. And not try to cross the pass and look for the Lozva tributary in the deep snow on the other side, or, although it blows away, go through the mountains.

And, most likely, they returned to Lozva on February 1, and on February 2, a local resident brought their things up and everyone was still alive. And then there is an explanation for the ski trails of tourists on Lozva.
However, both the footprints in the upper reaches of the Lozva and the guide's story may refer not to the Dyatlov group, but to the second group of tourists.
They write that I.D. Rempel persuaded Dyatlov not to walk this route, Gennady Patrushev persuaded him not to walk along the ridge and called him "die-hard", because Dyatlov did not change the chosen route, and also, judging by the diary entry, Ognev persuaded them not to walk. I think he told the tourists various horror stories about the place where they were going to go, maybe that's why the girls were in a bad mood. It was not just that they were discouraged from following this route. Strong cold and hurricane wind in the mountains and badly frozen Lozva river.
Let's try to get to that time for a minute. Auspiya ended and a gentle ascent to the slope of Mount Kholatchakhl began. The slope is pure ice, the wind knocks you down. The tourists could not get up and went down to Auspiya. During the day, they worked out, as the Woodpeckers wrote in their diary, a new method of walking (two steps forward, one back). We were very tired in the evening.
Now imagine the state of mind of tourists at this moment. It turned out that the ascent is impossible and it is impossible to follow this route. That the second option is to cross the pass and follow the Lozva tributary is also almost impossible. This tributary is a ditch, and the snow is 2 meters deep and the crust does not hold there. Dyatlov wrote that they covered 1-2 km in an hour. It also became clear that the weight of the luggage exceeds the capabilities of people. And also, at the top of the mountains, it turned out that the group was poorly dressed for frost and wind, and the tent was torn and blown in the wind. (From the general diary: "We agreed and we are going to the 41st section by car. We left only at 13-10, and in 41 we were about 16-30. We froze great, went to the GAZ-63 upstairs." There is still no gusty wind and frost in the mountains).
Based on the diary entries, the moral situation in the group was tense.
I think that the reason for this was the appearance in the group of Zolotarev. He was an adult, self-confident man, an instructor of a camp site, was sociable, knew many new songs. Of course, two girls Dubinin and Kolmogorov drew attention to him. Naturally, young men from the Dyatlov group were jealous when Zina Kolmogorova was interested in someone. Igor Dyatlov liked Zina, Zina had not yet finally decided on the choice and was open to any new impressions (judging by the entries from her diary). Where tourists went, there were few women and any free woman was the subject of the hobby and desire of men. And Zina was so pretty, so cheerful and sociable that everyone who saw her fell in love with her.
Imagine how Dyatlov felt when it turned out that he had chosen and insisted on a route that turned out to be impassable. And next to him was Zolotarev, who most likely understood faster than Dyatlov that the route was not passable and told him about it. Imagine how Dyatlov was at that moment ashamed in front of Zina, whom he loved and how low he fell in her eyes as an experienced leader of campaigns, how ashamed it was to return home to his comrades without completing the route. "Officially" the campaign of the Dyatlov group was timed to coincide with the XXI Congress of the CPSU. The Dyatlovites could not refuse to continue the campaign even when they realized that the route was not passable. What will they say to their fellow Komsomol members and communists? How will the parties face?
Imagine how Zolotarev felt, who went with Dyatlov only because he wanted to spend fewer days on the hike. And they were already delayed, trying to climb the ridge and lost a day, then they lost another day to set up a storage facility. I think that Zolotarev should have been very unhappy with Igor Dyatlov because he did not go along Lozva (along the river) to Otorten.
It was the moment of the highest moral tension in the group. It was necessary to make a decision to return and walk along Lozva, or maybe not at all.
This option could not suit Dyatlov. Then his authority was completely abolished.
Perhaps he insisted on walking along the ridge of the mountains, although, most likely, he realized that he was wrong.
At this moment, any incident can become a mechanism that will trigger a chain of ridiculous deaths.
If everything was not a staging and the tent really stood where it was found, then the wind was so strong that it tore and ruffled the old slope and it cracked. The tent immediately became unbearably cold. Someone (Thibault or Slobodin) came out to fasten the canvas of the tent slope, fell off the slope, hit his head on a stone and died almost immediately. The girls went into hysterics. Tourists, who until then could hardly restrain their dissatisfaction with Dyatlov, began to shout at him that he was to blame for everything. Dyatlov jumped out of the tent and walked away (very soon his heart stopped). Some of the tourists went to look for Dyatlov and froze.
Tent tracks are often mentioned. You know, there is a short road from my house to the bus stop, in winter there are tracks in the snow. Just looking at these traces, no one would think that people jumped out of the house at the same time for some unknown reason.
I've read about other bands. Heavy morale of people severe frost, a hurricane squally wind, which intensified frost and the perception of frost by the body, the absence of one leader, a torn tent, all this is a sufficient reason to die at such a distance from people and help.
Why did it get so loud?
I think that some other circumstances have superimposed.
I think that if Zolotarev had not gone with them, then Dyatlov, perhaps, would have admitted his mistake, returned to Lozva and successfully completed the route.
In other cases of the death of tourists, when it became known about this, no one was in a hurry to immediately go to the place of the tragedy, collect the bodies, find out the reasons for the death of the group. In the case of Korovina's group, the bodies lay for a month. Shoes also disappeared and the bodies were gnawed by wild animals.
And the shoes were taken off them, the shoes are expensive. There were cases of missing shoes when other groups died. They took it off, and then returned it, because the case became very loud. The eyes and tongue were eaten by small rodents, which became more active by May. There is no mysticism, if you think sensibly.
I think that Dyatlov did not change his mind to go to Otorten along the top of the mountains, which is why he decided to arrange a storage shed at such a distance from Otorten. Otherwise, this storage shed cannot be explained at all. From Otorten, Dyatlov wanted to go along a different slope of the mountains and did not intend to return to the upper reaches of the Auspiya.
Someone also probably felt unwell. I think Luda. Everyone forgets that women have their periods and then they have a headache, you can't lift weights and, in general, your condition is bad. How women felt among men on such days, I cannot imagine. There is nowhere to wash, no pads.
When I understand that tourists could have banal quarrels (without any booze), then other versions pale against the background of this fact.
Read the diary entries! Where do you see a similar group? Blog entries from the Internet:
"Then the discussion is resumed again and again, and all our discussions that have taken place during this time are mainly about love." (Kolya Thibault).
The initiator of these discussions is Zina Kolmogorova. They write that the passions of love were unknown to the tourists of that time and they went on a hike without distinguishing between the sexes, like comrades. And they slept in the same tent, not feeling passion, they write, they did not even know what sex is.
“It's especially hard to walk today. The trail is not visible, we often stray from it or go groping. Thus, we pass 1.5 - 2 km. in hour.
We are developing new methods for more productive walking. The first one throws off his backpack and walks for 5 minutes, after that he returns, rests for 10-15 minutes, then catches up with the rest of the group. This is how the non-stop way of laying the track was born. At the same time, it is especially difficult for the second, who walks along the track, torn by the first, with a backpack. .. Tired, exhausted, set about arranging an overnight stay. Little firewood. Weak raw ate. " (Dyatlov).
Raw spruce in the stove does not burn, which means there is no firewood, there is nothing to warm the tent, and not to dry the clothes. Everyone is tired and worn out. The day was wasted.
“Does he think I'm some kind of fool? Yes, and in general I like to add fuel to the fire, the devil would have kicked me ... The blinovites were accompanied with tears. The mood is ruined ... The mood is bad and probably will be another two days. Evil as hell. " (Luda) It is believed that Luda was in love with one of the Blinov Group (In Zhenya?).
“As always, I have again found some fellow countryman ... How can we go? Recently, the music, the guitar, the mandolin and so on, has been kind of terribly affecting me. The boys were making jokes last night. In my opinion, you shouldn't pay attention to them, maybe they will be less rude. And so far nothing. It’s time to leave, but everyone is still digging and digging. I don't understand how you can get ready for so long. The first 30 minutes have passed. Of course, the backpack is nothing, heavy. But you can go ... The first day is always difficult. Sashka Kolevatov tested his adaptation and threw it. After lunch we made only one transition and got up for a halt. I sewed up the tent. We went to bed. Igor was rude all evening, I just did not recognize him. I had to sleep on the wood by the stove "... (Zina)
The girl must go out on the route, and she sleeps on the wood, Igor, who must make sure that she sleeps, is rude to her.
And Kolmogorova again found a countryman. Any man dreams of being a fellow countryman of Zina and makes the whole group of tourists jealous, everyone likes Zina.
Kolevatov tried to carry weights on sleds, but the sleds fail, get stuck in the snow and Kolevatov threw them. They gather for a long time, walk slowly, sew up the tent.
“Luda quickly worked out, sat down by the fire. Kolya Thibault changed his clothes. He started writing a diary. The law is this: until all the work is over, do not approach the fire. And so they argued for a long time over who should sew up the tent. Finally, K. Thibault could not resist, took a needle. Luda remained seated. And we sewed holes (and there were so many of them that there was enough work for everyone, except for the two attendants and Lyuda. The guys are terribly outraged).
Today is Sasha Kolevatov's birthday. Congratulations, we are giving a tangerine, which he immediately divides into 8 parts (Luda went into the tent and did not go out again until the end of the dinner). "(Unknown).
From what was written it is clear that Dubinina was greatly offended by everyone, she sat in the tent all evening, she did not get the tangerine. Or maybe she felt bad. This is before the hike of the third difficulty group, when you need to mobilize all the forces of the body.
Why are the holes in the tent being sewn up all the time? So - bad clothes. Dubinina forgot her sweater, the sweatshirt was accidentally burned. There are holes in the tent. In the battle sheet "Evening Otorten" there is a note about one blanket that cannot warm 9 tourists. It's strange why there is only one blanket left and it is clear that it is very cold in the tent.
Once again, we will try to look into the tent of the Dyatlovites for a minute. On the street -20, hurricane wind, snow, blizzard. It is impossible to hang the stove (a strange design of the stove, suitable only for calm weather), there is no firewood, it is impossible to light a fire. The tent at this moment should "walk with a shake", "crumple" in the wind. It must be terribly cold inside the tent. On such a cold night, it is difficult to withstand, survive, not lose strength for the further journey.
Is it possible at this moment to undress for sleep, take off felt boots, sweatshirts and sleep sweetly?
Yes, this is nonsense in delirium that the Dyatlovites put up a tent and undressed for the night, took off their shoes! They began to write a battle sheet, cut the loin! After setting up the tent in such a squally wind, their clothes should become frosty, they should have been very cold and it was impossible to keep warm in the tent. It was as cold as outside, only there was less wind.
If at such a moment a rocket fell on the Dyatlovtsy, a yeti appeared, or the convicts went "on the light", then this is not just a blow of fate - it is a double blow. And so everything turned out very fatally, and then there was a rocket, like the killer's final chord - a shot in the head. Finish off - for sure.
I think that the decision to go to Otorten along the ridge was taken reluctantly, but by a majority of votes. Otherwise, they would have divided before the construction of the storage.
It is interesting that there are supporters of this version, but no one wants to hear this version. Because the intrigue disappears and a poorly planned tourist trip appears with gross miscalculations. The ideal tourist group disappears, and ordinary tourists appear (a little slovenly) with a not very experienced leader.
You see, there were enough circumstances to die. It is in this combination of circumstances that one can see a kind of otherworldly interference in the fate of people. It was this case that became the most mysterious story and over time, interest in the case only grows.

I reread the case materials for the thousandth time. Everyone writes that the group is ideal, the tourists are experienced, and the place where the group died is not dangerous - the slope is gentle, you can stay in any wind, no avalanches were recorded during the group's accident.

So - they could reach Otorten and died on the way back, when they went to the storage. What does it change? It changes the morale of people. From losers who did not cope with the route, they turn into winners. It was difficult and there were some troubles with discipline, love passions, clashes of characters, ailments, bad equipment that was not suitable for severe frost and wind, but they were able to go exactly as Igor Dyatlov planned - along the ridge, and to all the people who They tried to stop them, they proved that tourists are power.

My old versions.
I. Don't go there.
1. They searched for the missing group carefully, on a large scale and for a long time.
To begin to get acquainted with the case of the Dyatlov group, I think, you need to organize a search operation. On the search, four groups of students were collected, who were transferred to Ivdel. They were joined by the military - "a group of captain A. A. Chernyshev and a group of operational workers with dogs under the command of Senior Lieutenant Moiseyev, cadets of the school of sergeants under the command of Senior Lieutenant Potapov and a group of sappers with mine detectors under the command of Lieutenant Colonel Shestopalov. The Kurikovs helped the Mansi search engines" ...
And now, I'll tell you a secret. At that time and at a later time, both tourists and groups of tourists died. And nobody was looking for them! Moreover, no one searched on such a large scale and for such a long time. Just think about how much technology was used for search operations, how much money was invested in searches.
Question: why were you looking for these particular tourists? Searched and found, although the search lasted from February to May? Do you naively think that they would be looked for with planes, helicopters, with the military, if an avalanche simply came down, a UFO flew by, a yeti passed? The case was connected with a possible declassification of state secrets, which is why the search operation went on for so long and carefully.

My friends' daughter went on hikes of average difficulty. The group did not come from one campaign. The parents went to look for their daughter. They were told that there were several avalanches on the route at that time. If the tourists do not come out, then the parents will be given a certificate that their daughter is missing and that's it. Nobody went to look for tourists (they didn’t fly on airplanes, they didn’t attract search dogs and sappers with mine detectors).
How long can you, sitting at home, talk about the fact that a person goes to bed, warming a flask of coffee with his temple? Go on a hike and soon you will realize that survival on a hike is only a matter of yourself. And if you die, your body will remain where you died and no one cares about you! Go on at least one trip, and only then start drawing conclusions.

Next is the initial story. Much in my mind changes as I investigate the case, but for now I have left it.
2. How I was told about Dyatlov's group.
Five Jewish families lived in the five-story building in which I lived as a child. At that time, I did not know anything about the fact that they were Jews and no special treatment to this fact in my mind has not formed. The fact that my friend is Jewish, I learned while studying at the institute. We were friends because we lived in the same house, went to one class and one school. She was an unusually intelligent girl. And life in these families was different from the life and way of life in Russian families. I was very interested and curious about everything that I heard from my friend, now I think that all the topics that my friend brought to me were just discussed in this family over evening tea.
I was born in 1967. Around the age of ten, I heard from a friend about nine tourists who died in the mountains. The main information that I heard then was that a group of young people died from incredible fright. This is what a friend told me: “All night long, someone terrible walked around the tent in which the young people were sitting. They heard footsteps and saw the light shining through the tent curtain. In horror, the tourists cut open the tent and jumped out of it. And after a while, all the tourists were found dead in different places near the tent. Their faces were distorted with fright, their bodies were frozen, lying in unnatural positions, and the skin on their faces was orange. "
The friend's story shook me to the core. I was an impressionable girl, whose family traveled a lot and spent the night in an ordinary four-man canvas tent. In my family, no such events have ever been discussed. My parents were atheists. The life of my family was prosaic and all relationships within the family were purely everyday. I had to clean the floors and dishes, prepare my lessons carefully, weed the grass in the potato field in the summer and tended the animals. There could be no question of any dead tourists in my family.
It becomes clear why I remember this story, told to me as a child by a friend, to this day.

3. To understand what happened, you can only know and understand that time.
Now, when many versions have appeared, when many people have carefully studied the material about the cause of the death of the group, and the main thing is that these materials have become publicly available, it makes it possible to consider this story both from the point of view of known facts, and from the point of view of their everyday experience, from a glance a person who lived in that Soviet post-war period.
I am sure that modern youth, no matter how hard they try, will not be able to fully understand the whole history, will not be able to appreciate everything, getting used to the course of events and trying them on for themselves, because young people are now completely different, they have different values \u200b\u200band completely different outlook on life.
Looking at the photographs taken by Dyatlov's group on this trip, I see and feel more the lively cheerful faces of tourists. I also had a FED camera, many children were doing photography then. And I have a lot of black and white pictures with different groups of people in them. This was the case in many families. So at that time they tried to capture many events in their lives. Sometimes I go through these pictures, examine them. Many of the people captured in these pictures are no longer alive. What can you do, that's life. The only thing that pulsates in the mind is that these people from the Dyatlov group were still very young, now from the height of their age, I would say they are quite children. But again, I will make an allowance for the fact that the time was completely different. And at 24, a young man, boy or girl, were already adults, perfectly formed personalities. Now they are children. And then, already adults. People with inner qualities, which are so few in today's youth. These were young people with deep love for their homeland, with patriotism, with clear political views and convictions. They were characterized by heroism and self-sacrifice for the sake of saving other people. They were united by a feeling of friendship, strong and indestructible. This is so difficult for young people to understand. There are no feelings for the Motherland, no patriotism. Heroism, in order to save others, has become an exceptional rarity. Friendship disappeared altogether. There is no friendship now in the concept in which it was then.
And we were atheists. And they did not believe at all in otherworldly worlds and phenomena. And such phenomena happened extremely rarely. To a greater extent, these were horror stories, similar to fairy tales, than real facts. There were wolves, bears and wild boars in the forests, and there were a lot of stories about them, and they often approached houses in villages, and were much worse than flying balls.
My grandparents (the Kingdom of Heaven) told a lot about the war and we, the children, lived as if this war had not spared us either. We played war and clearly knew how to defend the border of our homeland and that the enemies are not asleep and we must always be on the alert. These stories brought up in us a certain suspicion of possible enemies of the Motherland and communism. Young people from the Dyatlov group were much closer in time to the war. All these feelings were heightened in them. They knew firmly who is friend and who is enemy. These were very weighty concepts, absorbed from the war in the country, with a clear political ideology in the country. It is now that they will begin to instill in you that it is common for young people to rebel and go against the policy of the whole country. Yes, there were few such rebels then. “The party said: we must! The Komsomol answered: yes! And this political slogan is not a joke or a practical joke, but a clear guide to action, absorbed into the blood from an early age, with mother's milk.
It is absolutely impossible to understand this whole story without taking into account these facts. People have changed a lot, their worldview has changed.

4. Best Detective Story.
I looked through a lot of information, what I found about the Dyatlov group, those documents that are known to the entire Internet community, reconstructions of the death of the group, as well as comments on them. Now I cannot tell you the best author and the best version. My opinion on this matter changes with deepening information on the case.

5. What evil force was chasing the Dyatlovites?
It is very easy and simple to explain everything by the fact that, as they say: "The brick fell on my head." Or it can be explained in another way, say, by a coincidence. But the brick, you know, falls on the person's head, creating one single connection. The brick fell on his head and the man died. Everything, and no man's walking after this event is provided. He fell - he died. One connection.
In many explanations for the situation with the death of the Dyatlov group, it turns out some kind of multi-move. The brick fell, and fell, fell, fell, and everything exactly hit the head. But the fall of a brick is just a coincidence. Even a shell does not fall twice into one funnel, so they say. And then the blast wave beat, beat and finished off the whole group. Well, how can one believe in such versions?
So the story with the deceased group suggests that although something terrible happened, people put up worthy resistance, showed that, although they were frightened, they did not surrender to circumstances, but took quite sufficient actions to survive in the situation. They were not completely confused, did not disperse in different directions, did not freeze one by one, but grouped together and began to survive: they broke branches, built a flooring, insulated themselves with clothes that they could get hold of, made a fire. They had a knife, matches and wood. It was only necessary to wait out the dark time of the day and go to his storage shed, where there were food and things and spare skis. And, after all, if you think deeply, then they had a chance for survival, not for the whole group, but for some. They had to certainly survive in that situation. But this would be the case if the matter concerned the forces of otherworldly, or isolated natural phenomena. It is only in horror movies that the evil force chases after heroes until it finishes everyone. In life, the case is isolated, then it is the case. And everything else is already a pattern and cannot be attributed to the horror stories about the Mountain of the Dead, the Mansi warnings: "Do not go there," and the mysterious figure 9. All this is just a warning that it is dangerous to go there, that they have already died there when people. Dangerous does not mean necessarily fatal. After all, as pilgrims go there now tourists and, laughing at the warning of the Mansi, go in a group of 9 people.
Then, the Mansi have holy places there. They had to invent all sorts of horror stories so that the tourists did not go and their clumsy actions did not spoil the order and the well-established life. If faith in sacred things was as deep among the people of that time as the feeling of patriotism, then no one would have died. Why do they tell us: “Don't go there”! Do we climb hard? Where it is dangerous. Warned that it is dangerous, why walk? Why, in passing, brush aside the traditions and beliefs of other peoples, from another culture and other views on life, believing that our views and beliefs are the only correct and true: “And we are knee-deep in the sea. And we do not believe and do not believe, but we will go anyway. We want to pull the mustache on death ”!
Everything is clear when an avalanche falls asleep in a group of tourists. This is comparable to falling bricks. Action and result. And that's it, no further rassalivanie happens. I am writing this for those who offer versions akin to a fallen brick and then keep silent about all the other facts. And people from the Dyatlov group still walked and lived and acted. All the same, they would freeze, so they explain what importance is where, and in what order.
But what kind of Evil Power do you have? So he chases the Dyatlovites. And so in the nature of things never happens.

7. Why did the tourists leave the tent?
Here we would compete in inventing horror stories, if there were no chains of traces left that indicate that the Dyatlovites did not scatter in different directions from fear, but left in a group with a full complement or one less, we will say that it is a completely full complement. We left the tent, went out into the cold, leaving warm clothes in the tent.
For example, a ball lightning appeared, a UFO, a rocket flew by. Why cut the ramp if the ball lightning will quickly reach the ramp? Or did the snow cover the entrance so that you had to cut the tent?
I dismiss the avalanche versions and the possibility that a snow slab has slid onto the tent, because if the injuries of Dubinina, Zolotarev, Thibault-Brignoles were received at the beginning of the incident, then who fought for their lives if the others were without shoes?
For example, an animal came, jumped on a tent, piled on. The tourists began to beat him with an ice ax and so cut the slope, the animal ran away. They got out through the cut. The animal returned, wounded and angry (left no traces, no blood on the tent and around).
Fear forced them to cut the tent, but they did not run, but went from the tent, leaving there the most necessary things for survival (shoes, warm clothes, food).
Such actions can only be explained by general insanity, but subsequently the work necessary for survival was done, logical actions were taken.
But the cuts on the tent, then this fact, in itself, can be put as a point on a straight line, literally anywhere. The fact itself does not mean that it happened exactly at the moment in which we want to see it. The cuts could have appeared during the event that forced the Dyatlovites to leave the tent, as well as after it.
I found that the searchers, who found the tent, shoveled the snow and cut the slope with an ice ax in two places, even, they said, a piece of the tent came off.

8. When did the tourists get injuries incompatible with life?
The second inference relates to the final trauma with which the tourists were found. This fact, it seems, can also be put anywhere during the entire duration of the events, as long as the last of the Dyatlovites remained alive. But here it is quite obvious that with such injuries no one will walk a kilometer and a half through the snow, no one will strenuously fight for their lives: go, collect brushwood and branches, climb a cedar for branches for flooring, make a fire. Having such injuries, a person needs help and needs someone who will fight for him, and make selfless efforts to save him.
And this is a very big job, given that a group of Dyatlovites at a time when it was necessary to fight not only for their own life, but also for someone else, even if for life best friend, turned out to be at that moment half-naked in bad weather and severe frost. So the amount of work that would have gone to those who did not receive serious injuries incompatible with life exceeded the capabilities of these people. They would have to carry the wounded, take care of them, not themselves. Dubinina, Zolotarev, and Thibault-Brignoles had injuries incompatible with life and, meanwhile, turned out to be the best dressed, were for some time in better living conditions. They had a flooring of branches in a ravine, protected from the wind. Even if they were dragged, laid, clothed, dying groaning, on the verge between life and death. It's easy to write, and you drag the wounded on you, having only socks on your feet! Put Zolotarev on your back, and make efforts to save yourself and himself. And yet you dragged him to the cedar, and then what? It will take some more time until a place for the flooring is found, until this place is prepared, branches are broken and trained, and laid on the flooring. Where were the wounded all this time? Lying in a row in the snow and biding their time until everything settled down and they were seated on the floor? But they have no signs of frostbite.
The versions that Zolotarev, Dubinina and Thibault-Brignoles were injured at the very beginning of the unfolding tragedy seem devoid of any sense to everyone who dealt with snow, frost and understands what a person can and cannot be in the snow only in socks.
Pay attention to the fact that Doroshenko, Krivonischenko, Kolmogorova and Dyatlov, who, as it were, suffered the brunt of the work in the snow under the cedar, were found in socks and only Slobodin had one felt boot, and Zolotarev and Thibault, who, in the course of such versions, should there were only rescuers in shoes, Zolotarev in cloaks, and Thibault in felt boots.

9. Zolotarev Sasha - why do we highlight him?
And Zolotarev in this story is a very extraordinary personality. “Zolotarev Semyon (Alexander) Alekseevich, born in 1921, was from the conscripts of 1921-22. went through almost the entire war, was a Komsomol organizer of the battalion, after the war he joined the party. He had 4 military awards, after the war he worked as a tourism instructor at the Artybash camp site (Altai), then moved to sverdlovsk region, where he got a job as a senior tourism instructor at the Kourovskaya camp site.
War does not leave a random person alive. Only a person who is very adapted to life, who has a direct bestial instinct and global intuition, who has intelligence and common sense, who knows how to soberly assess the situation and who finds the only right way out, who knows how to use the human resources around him, will survive. This is not just a lucky man who is "afraid of a bullet and does not take a bayonet", he is a man who knows how to survive in any situation, having the main task - survival, and not time-inspired unjustified heroism.
And if you ask me who was bound to survive, then I will answer that it was Zolotarev. To survive, he had to be prepared for any difficult situation that happens on the road. In the tent, he undoubtedly had to occupy the best place in order to quickly leave it in case of danger. Zolotarev, of course, should have been the best dressed. And he had to take the most reliable measures for his own salvation and the salvation of the people with whom he found himself in the group. In general, being close to Zolotarev at the time of a tragic situation meant surviving or holding out as long as possible. Being able to survive, Zolotarev saved others as well as he could.
And if you tell me that contrary to the laws of nature, in a difficult situation, which takes a long time to overcome, some lucky Vasya will survive, and Zolotarev will die, because he was simply unlucky, then I will never believe in it. Zolotarev was not just the oldest of the guys. He was much wiser and more experienced, went through military school from the very beginning and received an award for unsinkability - his own life. And if he did not die immediately and was not initially significantly injured, then it was he who had to rally around himself a group of tourists who were finally supposed to survive. And that is what most likely happened. It was these four people who held out the longest, it was they who turned out to be dressed better than the others and had a shelter to hold out until daylight and go to the storage shed where there were things and food. Even Zolotarev and Thibault did not have traces of frostbite, and this was another plus for their further survival. In general, there was no reason for them to die, and they had to continue to struggle with the natural phenomenon and overcome it. And I can't write off everything here to the fact that Zolotarev could have succumbed to emotions, a sense of guilt for the dead comrades, it was Zolotarev who should have been not inclined to sentimentality and disgust about the clothes removed from his dead friends. They are dead anyway and they don't need clothes. And the living need it. What kind of sentiment is there? It was Zolotarev, like no one else, who was ready for death, he saw death, he was accustomed, as far as possible, to death, he did not feel the emotions about death that anyone who has not dealt with death so closely.
Here you, if you find yourself in that situation, it would take time, say, a week of a very difficult existence, to part with some kind of moral principles. For example, would you decide to go to the dead bodies at night to take off their clothes?
Doroshenko and Krivonischenko were found under the cedar, almost naked, in shirts and underpants. They could not have been undressed by accident or undressed themselves, parts of their clothes were found near the cedar or on the flooring in different places.
It is also obvious that at the time of deciding what to do and how to proceed further, the group of tourists split up: two tourists, led by Dyatlov, went towards the tent (walking from the tent), two stayed at the cedar, and three stayed with Zolotarev on flooring.
If the situation is difficult, then there should be one leader and one person should make decisions, like a captain on a ship.
What could be done in a situation where most of the group is standing in the snow wearing only socks? The most important thing is to keep your feet warm! First, insulate your legs, and then everything else: drag, chop, fire. What is the fastest way to insulate everyone's feet? You can only make a flooring from branches, laying these branches for flooring in a windless place.
Not surprisingly, Dubinina was with Zolotarev, a girl who proved her ability to endure and wait when she was shot in the leg on another trip. FROM
this group turned out to be Kolevatov - executive and pedantic. All men in this group were older than the rest of the tourists.
And the fact that Krivonischenko and Zolotarev were buried separately from the whole group, in another cemetery, nearby in closed coffins, also remains a fact that is not entirely clear: one was found with the first group of dead tourists, the second with the second group. For the first one, the parents asked, they wanted to be buried at the Ivanovskoye cemetery, and Zolotarev, why were they separated from the second group of bodies found?
To give the whole history a modern direction, I want to believe that Zolotarev did not die then. That another person was buried in his place. After all, he was identified twice, confused with Doroshenko. And then he was buried in a closed coffin. I want to believe that Zolotarev completed the task that he was entrusted with. That he, as befits such a person, could not just die and surrender even to a superior enemy.

10. Other people.
It is obvious to me that some other people were present in this tragedy. Because a footprint was found from a boot that did not belong to the members of the group, a scabbard and a piece of greatcoat cloth and a soldier's winding. Yes, these strangers had to be only because Zolotarev, Dubinina, Kolevatov, Thibault-Brignoles, had to survive, had to overcome the elements. Why hide the flooring, if the threat could not go down to them and harm them?
Only other people could finish off and finish off, which any natural phenomenon will never do to you. The story about when the evil force returned, not from an abnormal (parallel) world, it only concerns the relationship between people.
Surely these strangers had weapons that they could threaten. Most likely this weapon was not a firearm. Because keeping a group of nine people is impossible if you never use your firearm. Those you are holding will very quickly realize that not a single shot has been fired at them and will simply stop being afraid.
But even a very large group of other people, I do not really represent in those conditions, because the traces of their stay would be more numerous. And this is someone else's ski track, and the Mansi hunters would probably know about the presence of some other people on the territory where the tragedy broke out.
But this, of course, is already speculation. I think that it is impossible to clean up the place without leaving traces. Didn't these people appear out of thin air? They had to go through villages, had to be noticed by the local population, before they got to this place. If they arrived by helicopter, there should have been a trace of the helicopter landing.
The flooring, too, could not be hidden, but simply choose a windy place. After all, there was nothing to dig a den in the snow, there was no shovel. They write that even a place for a tent was dug with skis. (We, traveling in winter, we always took a shovel, or even two. We need to clear the place of snow, level the area, clear the snow around the tent, if it snows all night, then the duty officer must watch and clean the snow near the entrance, sweep the snow from the tent. This is a lot of work. If there is one shovel, then one digs, and the rest are freezing in the cold).
From the point of view of the appearance of strangers, everything is clear. They drove the Dyatlovites out into the cold almost naked, drove them away from the tent and decided to wait until they freeze. Then they saw that the tourists did not freeze, and even made a fire and, perhaps, warmed up and were ready for a retaliatory attack, went to look for them, found those who did not die of freezing, killed, then, hid their tracks and left.
For example, prisoners who fled from the colony. Correctional labor colonies are located around the scene. They reject this version because, presumably, at that time no one from the colony escaped, and they do not flee, they say in winter time... There is nothing in the forest, it's cold, you can find on the tracks.
An interesting version of the meeting of the group with poachers.
I don't think it was a planned murder. Perhaps Dyatlov's group met another group of people that could not be there at that moment. And the Dyatlovites not only suspected them, but also openly expressed their doubts. True, I'm not smart enough to put forward versions of a more complex plan. Involving criminals, the KGB, and spy groups in their reasoning. I do not really believe that there could be a planned delivery, because the creators of this version themselves understand how difficult it was not to separate in time and such a complex space, for two groups, in the event that part of the group in the whole story is not dedicated and understands why biding time. It would be a very complex operation, completely uncontrollable, where any miscalculation would lead to a fatal result.

11. Consequence.
The investigation was conducted as always in our country - under pressure from above, and from this it seems: negligent, chaotic, stupid, strange.
The first version of the investigation was an attack on a group of tourists by Mansi hunters. After all, it was their interests that were affected, their shrines were disturbed. The Mansi had a very good reason to scare the tourists, drive them out of the sacred territory. But the Mansi had no reason to destroy and finish off a group of tourists. And it was the Mansi, from whom nothing escapes in their forest, who saw someone else's ski track. It is very strange that they were released, it was so convenient to write off the whole tragedy on them.
In the version about the death of a group of tourists at the hands of people, many see that the tent was not robbed, food, alcohol, valuables and many other things did not disappear. (Some notebooks, diaries, photographic films disappeared, six out of ten were missing, no one knew exactly how many things were and what things were, the belonging of the things was determined approximately).
Firearms, if any, never fired at any of the group members. But this only proves that these strangers did not need the valuables and alcohol found in the tent. The tragedy most likely happened by accident.
Of course, investigator Ivanov was forced to present everything as he was ordered. And also the case could not disappear completely, dissolve into oblivion, the fathers of Slobodin and Dubinina could demand an objective investigation of the death of children. Especially Dubinina's father, because her body was found in a very terrible state. Looking at his daughter's body, the father could not help but understand that she was not just frozen. He could not be satisfied with this outcome of the investigation.
Here it is obvious that the investigation had a directive to present everything as an accident, and the one who ordered this was aware of the events that took place at the pass or what reasons could lead to such tragic consequences. I think that the investigation would not hide the meeting of the Dyatlovites with the spy group, if it all came down to this. Why hide the fact that tourists were vigilant during that difficult post-war time for the country? Concealment was necessary and necessary in the event that their own destroyed their own. After all, this fact could not be clearly explained to the people. It was necessary to hide if their own were engaged in some kind of secret development or testing in this deserted place, about which no one needed to know.

12. Orange skin of the dead.
There was also a great resonance among the people. There were many search engines who probably shared information, Yudin survived, who was also not satisfied with the course of the investigation, and there were a large number of people at the funeral. For whom the fact that excites the imagination was the skin color of the victims. So much so that many years later, I learned from a friend that the skin color of the dead tourists was orange! Many unsuccessfully try to explain this orange skin color and often simply dismiss it (the name of the color can be the perception of each individual person, from here it is clear that the color of the tourists' skin was not ordinary for a frozen deceased person, I think, among the people who attended the funeral there were people who had seen the frozen dead before this incident, had experience, and for them, like many others, the color of their skin was strange, this color defied logic and experience). And the first thing that can come to mind is radiation or chemical poisoning. And a radiation examination was carried out. Otherwise, why would it be carried out? Nobody checks frozen bodies for radiation. And radiation was found on the clothes of the victims.

13. A strange act.
It also seems strange what Krivonischenko did at the station. Entry from the diary of Lyudmila Dubinina: "January 24. (...) There was one small incident - Yurka K. was taken to the police, accusing him of deceit. Our Yura decided to walk around the station with a hat, and with the performance of some song. I had to help out (....) ". A strange incident, because this trick threatened to disrupt the entire campaign, or Krivonischenko's participation in it. Nowadays it is more common for young people to fool around, knowing that this will not entail any consequences. At that time, they were fooling around with a look around, and illegal songs were sung and texts were rewritten, but everything is in the strictest confidence, and not at the station, not in front of strangers. Self-discipline and self-control were more developed. And then there is such unjustified tomfoolery - holding out his hat, he asked for alms. He sang a song at the station, where the patrol went and it was forbidden to sing. All this can be understood only if Krivonischenko had to get to the police station under some pretext, so that the group did not suspect anything. Veselchak, they would certainly have taken on a hike, but the fool - no. This is an insignificant fact, which, in general, does not prove anything, but very strange in light of the fact that the entire group of tourists died.

14. Where has the language disappeared?
Another fact that worries the minds of people investigating the death of the Dyatlovites is the absence of eyeballs in Zolotarev and Dubinina and language in Dubinina. This is the same explainable phenomenon... And I wonder why anyone thinks people did it. They killed and then mocked the bodies. What for? Or interrogated, squeezing out the eyeballs? What for? And what was the interrogation about? The entire group was already dead by this time. But if a person's tongue is ripped out, or his eyeballs are squeezed out, then he will definitely never tell anything. I think that in this case everything is more prosaic. After death, Dubinina's mouth was open, and her face was turned to the side, where animals or birds could reach, which always eat out the eyes and tongue first. The bodies of Dubinina and Zolotarev were not found longer than others and underwent more decomposition and more change. They lay there for another month and not a trace of them would have remained.

II. Logical chains.

1. Let's go back to Zolotarev.
I will start with the personality of Sasha Zolotarev. From the conclusion of the forensic medical examination: “On the back of the right hand at the base of the thumb there is a tattoo of“ Gena ”. On the back of the right forearm in the middle third there is a tattoo with the image of a beet and the letter C, on the back of the left forearm there are tattoos with the image of "G + S", "DAERMMUAZUAYA", a five-pointed star and the letter C, the letters "G + C + P \u003d D" and " 1921 ". You can find many forums and sites where people are trying to figure out the meaning of these tattoos. Basically, all reasoning boils down to the fact that the body that was buried was not the body of Semyon Zolotarev, that, most likely, it was Gena (Gennady), a prisoner from the colony, of which there were many in the place where the tragedy occurred. "DAERMMUAZUAYA" - words that have been filled with a new tattoo in order to hide the meaning of the old one. For example, it is difficult to score the letter M with a new letter, and the letter G may well turn out to be the letter E, if you just add two lower sticks to it, you can make the letter A from the letter L by adding a crossbar. There are no real witnesses to that story and it is impossible to know for sure whether the body was identified and whether Zolotarev's mother really came to the funeral.
But there was another story known to me, which I know for certain, when the mother did not identify the body of her deceased son. It is impossible to find out in a situation where the body, and especially the face, has undergone significant changes. You can only reliably identify things if you have information about things. But many parents, if children do not live permanently with them, are little aware of their child's things. It is possible to identify teeth and crowns if such information is available, but many parents do not reliably know about this. And Zolotarev lived separately for a long time and, as you know, only occasionally visited his mother. In this case, a DNA examination would help, only this could clarify and finally certify whether Zolotarev was actually found and buried, with whose personality there are so many questions, inconsistencies and inconsistencies. Let's look at the monument erected in memory of a group of tourists at the Mikhailovsky cemetery (Yekaterinburg) and find that Zolatarev A.I. is buried, we find, for example, a party card, and there Zolotarev Semyon Alekseevich, we find other documents where Zolotarev Semyon Alekseevich and we also read the plate on the personal monument at the Ivanovskoye cemetery. We also learn that Zolotarev asked to call himself Alexander.
Here's a version. Eight people were immediately found, all except Zolotarev. Let's just say, missing. But this cannot be opened to the public. Endless questions and suspicions will arise. In this case, it is much easier to make a dramatization, hide bodies, disfigure faces beyond recognition, delay the investigation, wait for the moment when everyone is tired of waiting for the denouement. The first bodies of tourists were buried with a large crowd of people, and Zolotarev was only 12 people. They buried him in a closed zinc coffin in another cemetery.

2. Versions of the division of power and conflict over the right to women.
Let's say that the incident that caused the death of tourists was the most common: they did not share the power, they did not share the girls.
Looking at the photographs of the campaign of the Dyatlov group, I see that in some of the photographs Zolotarev is talking with Kolmogorova, it is noticeable that he draws attention to the beautiful girl. Zina Kolmogorova has complex relationships with men in the group. Igor Dyatlov likes her, they find a photo of Zina with him. Here are the lines from Zina Kolmogorova's diary: "After lunch, we made only one transition and got up to a halt. I sewed up the tent. We went to bed. Igor was rude all evening, I simply did not recognize him. I had to sleep on the wood by the stove." There are many other entries from the girl's diary, which directly say that there was no ideal relationship in the group of young tourists. What does the phrase say that Igor is rude?
And the fact that there was no sex between them does not affect the relationship at all. Rather, it intensifies passions even more.
Before the hike, Zina had a relationship with Yura Doroshenko, you can find information that they were going to get married, but something went wrong with them, in a letter to a friend on the train, the girl writes: "He walks with some of the girls by the handle . Jealous. " "We are together and not together." Here a whole love ball, an explosion of passions immediately arises.
How can you discard all these facts, talking about UFOs, missile launches, control delivery? The relationship of tourists on a hike can ruin any ideal situation.
Both women could become a detonator, a trigger mechanism, provoke a situation and consequences by any of their inappropriate actions.
You will say that these were disciplined marching women who are not aware of passion, rebellion and inappropriate behavior?
Reading the wall newspaper, which the tourists supposedly made on the day of their death, one cannot fail to notice that there are hints of love affairs in the group. "Let's meet the XXI Congress with an increase in the birth rate of tourists!"
I also noticed how different attitudes and understanding of events in the brain of men and women differ. Men will notice the note about the sleigh and about the Bigfoot and ignore the tourist birth rate recorded in the first paragraph.
A quarrel over girls could occur both within the group and with someone whom the group could meet on the hike, any group of men (In such remote places, women are always fewer and they can always become a cause of interest and a cause of disputes between men).
There was also a possible conflict of leaders in the group. Researchers write that only leaders went on this campaign. And Dyatlov was not an ideal group leader. In a difficult situation, no single decision was made, it is clear that the group was divided.
It can definitely be said as a group, about three tourists, and, possibly, Dubinina Luda, who were found nearby, with a certain interaction with each other (lying next to each other, one hugging the other).
All other tourists did not form a group, split up, found them in different places. Krivonischenko and Doroshenko did not die in the positions in which they found bodies under the cedar (the body is stretched out, the hand is thrown behind the head). They (or one of them) could be found and brought under the cedar, undressed and left to lie there.
3. Before or after climbing Otorten?
I also often think that the tragedy happened after climbing Mount Otorten, there are several clues about this. So the newspaper is called "Vecherniy Otorten", why call a wall newspaper like that if the job has not been done yet? Why was there only one log when the ascent was to come? Why did they park so quickly when it was only 2 km to the storage shed? Did you step back a little and get up right away? Or maybe we didn't get there a little on the way back? And the last photo, where they put up a tent on the slope of the mountain and the place where they found it, the researchers notice that the slopes are different, in the photo the slope is greater. Although, you can be wrong here. I often take pictures on a hike. Photos of slopes do not show the steepness of the slope. The tent in the photo was photographed from different points: from the bottom and from the top. The steepness of the slope in the photo always seems to be less.

4. Anomalous versions.
To be honest, I do not consider anomalous versions of events. On two nights, Sergei and I saw a UFO in the sky, so what? UFO flew high in the sky, we did not touch. Not a scary phenomenon.
I was afraid of wild animals, and Sergei was afraid of people. Very often he chose places remote from people and housing as a place to spend the night.
Many times we found ourselves at the cemetery late in the evening, after nine o'clock in the evening, once we spent the night near the cemetery. Nothing abnormal has ever happened!

5. From the experience of winter nights.
I will tell you a little about winter overnight stays. I was very surprised by the fact that seasoned tourists do not share their experience of their overnight stays. So, we spent the night at minus 20 degrees in a three-person nylon tent with a double layer of the finest material. Such two-layer tents, undoubtedly, keep warm better, perfectly save from the wind, and get wet a little. We had a small Pathfinder gas oven. Last night the snow was 30cm high. In the tent, from the work of the gas stove, it immediately becomes warm, after 15 minutes you can sit in the tent in only shorts, because it is warm there. During the last night we slept without the gas stove turned on. Warmed things up and turned off. We didn’t experiment with cold and survival, it was just warm. At night, if they wanted to pee, they went out shod in rubber boots, but barely dressed, it was lazy, although it was cold outside. Only one night Sergei jumped out of the tent naked, not wearing shoes. On that cold autumn night, it seemed to him that mermaids were swimming in the lake next to which we camped.
Considering the photographs where the Dyatlovites stand in thin hats, with open windbreakers, without scarves, it is hard to believe that the temperature is minus 20 grams. At minus 20 g, frost freezes from walking on parts of clothing close to the face. Frost freezes from breathing when walking. Hat, collar near the face, everything becomes white, needle-like.
True, on hikes, it was often when the weather was changing rapidly, and the wind in open areas was so strong that it knocked me off my feet and there was no way to walk, only to crawl on all fours.
Also, Sergei noticed that such traces, as found near the tent, could have formed only if the snow was wet. Only in this case the snow is compressed and then, after melting, the tracks appear like columns. In such an open place, where the Dyatlov group's tent stood, there was a very strong wind, and the wind is much more inconvenient than frost. For people without clothes, it was important to quickly shelter from the wind. At the same time, being in the snow without shoes meant quickly perishing. I find versions that one tourist was blown away by the wind when he went out to pee, while others rushed to help, and they were also blown away by the wind. It may well be, but why cut the tent?
Once we swam in a spring at minus 20g. On that trip I put on nylon tights and thin socks. It was not cold to swim in the cold. It was cold to stand on the frozen floor and pull on nylon tights. While I was trying to put on my shoes as soon as possible, I almost got frostbitten on my feet, I dressed poorly, one toe got lost inside the boot. Cried from the cold. What saved me was that they came to the monastery, it was warm there. I took off my shoes and for about half an hour tried to warm my legs and howled in pain when my legs began to move away a little. While I was putting on tights, I stood completely naked, in the cold, after swimming and my body was not frozen at all, only my legs were frozen. Since then, I am sure that to be left without shoes is certain death, and if you had to remain in the cold without shoes, you need to take off your clothes and warm your feet.
Second, you need to walk or collect firewood while a person is moving, even little dressed, but with insulated legs, he is less likely to freeze. Third, you need to look for shelter as soon as possible.
The conclusion is simple. Anyone who has little experience of survival in cold conditions will not walk in the snow in only socks, he will very quickly begin to redistribute clothes, tear off the sleeves from his jacket (cut with a knife) and wrap his legs. If experienced people did not do this, it means that they did not go down to the cedar, did not drag the bodies of injured comrades there, did not collect brushwood for the fire, which means that they died on the way from the tent down, and not when climbing up to it.
The fire by the cedar could well have been a signal fire (if the tourists didn't go to the tent, but got lost on the way from it and was intended to gather everyone in one place), but most likely it was intended for heating. Going down and making a signal fire is very logical, but here's how, after leaving the fire in the darkness of the night, to find a tent if you have moved one and a half kilometers away? This is completely impossible, that's what I know for sure, if the same signal fire is not lit near the tent (they write that there was a large signal lamp on the tent, that's why it was visible).
There were cases when, during winter fishing, we went into the lake on the ice for one and a half to two kilometers, and then we had to return to the car to take something. The car from the fishing spot was always clearly visible and it seemed that it would be easy to go back later and find your fishermen. But on the shore it turned out that it was very difficult to find the way back. All fishermen were the same from afar. All were sitting on boxes, in raincoats called chemical protection. From a distance, everyone was the same. The trajectory of the path was quickly forgotten, it was impossible to find the way back if one of his own did not give a noticeable signal from the shore (Usually he got up and waved his hands, with a clear day and good visibility).
Even during the day, I do not believe that finding a tent if walking from the cedar was easy. At night, it was completely unrealistic. Therefore, Kolmogorov, Dyatlov and Slobodin, were most likely the first to die when they descended from the tent. They didn't warm their legs. Lagged behind the group, lost in the turmoil. I find versions that they were blinded, so they crawled towards the tent. You see, even if there was good visibility, the tent was difficult to find and find direction to it. It was easy to get away from her, but very difficult to return, up the slope in strong wind and frost, poor visibility (unrealistic for a healthy person). If it was necessary to find a tent, then one would have to go to it in its own footsteps, and these three did not follow in the footsteps.
I will add about the equipment. At 10-15 degrees of frost, they dressed like this: a cotton undershirt, a sweater, a quilted jacket (wadded, quilted), a cotton scarf on the head, a hat with ear flaps (rabbit, beaver) on top, the ears were tied, the legs were tied with cotton tights and cotton quilted trousers, plain and woolen socks and felt boots with chemical protective stockings. Over the padded jacket, I wore a raincoat with a hood, and on top of a chemical protection raincoat. Coated fur mittens on the hands. It was always much colder on the lake, a strong piercing wind was blowing. We went into the lake for 5 km while we were walking, but it was hard to walk, it was hot. They came, drilled holes, sat down. It was getting cold very quickly. Feet in felt boots and hands were freezing. To protect from the wind, fishermen sew a bag from a transparent film, which they put on top.
Yesterday, just such an air temperature happened, minus 20g. I was dressed warmly, immediately froze in the wind. I thought about those who are talking, sitting in warm apartments, about what could and could not have happened: about hurricanes and the difficulties of the route, about freezing temperatures, about wet sleeping bags, about a wet tent.
The fire, which was lit near the cedar, if it was not a signal fire, most likely, was set up in a place where it was easier to collect firewood for kindling. As winter overnight stays showed, a green spruce burns best of all, flares up and burns like gunpowder, but dry trees that have been under the snow burn badly, so that such firewood would require diesel fuel, they stubbornly did not want to flare up. At first, while there were a lot of branches, there is enthusiasm, because it quickly becomes warm around the fire, even in severe frost. It is worth getting a little warm and you don't want to leave the fire. It quickly becomes clear that such fuel will not be enough for a long time, because it burns out instantly, and for new branches you had to climb higher and higher and break them off with your body weight.
People who find themselves in such a situation must set a specific goal for themselves, do this and that, then the meaning will be seen in all actions. If you understand that you will certainly perish when the available branches of the cedar run out, then very soon you will not want to do anything, realizing the meaninglessness of actions.

6. The sequence of deaths.
I come to almost the same conclusion as in the first part. Three tourists were killed almost immediately, six people went downstairs. Two more died under a cedar, and four on the floor lived longer than others, because they had everything for survival: they had a good organization and one leader, were shod and dressed, sheltered from the cold and wind, could wait for the morning and go to the tent or storage skis and clothes. Everyone who could break the unity of the group and decision-making, namely Kolmogorova, Dyatlov and Doroshenko, were no longer alive. But for some reason they did not go, but were found with broken ribs and faces changed beyond recognition, with radiation on their clothes. Although complete nonsense, the conclusion suggests itself that at the moment when a group of four tourists took refuge in a ravine, that ill-fated snow slab descended on them (an explosion occurred with a radiation release), which killed the survivors.
If the sequence is as follows: three got lost and died, two made a fire and waited for those three, hoping that they were alive, and four hid on the floor. Here, there is a division of the group into smaller groups of people: Kolmogorova and Dyatlov, separately from them Doroshenko, separately from them Zolotarev and the people who joined them. This is how they should have dispersed if it was about love and the division of power. Dyatlov could not be next to Zolotarev, Doroshenko could not be next to Dyatlov. Here is a close-knit, closely-knit, carefully selected group of people.
Four from the floor, could actually live, or maybe lived longer. Zolotarev could have gone away altogether for help. I realized how hopeless everything was and left. And the criminal case on the death of tourists was opened on February 6. It means that someone reported that the tourists were killed. Although, this person could not have been Zolotarev, but Sasha Kolevatov. About him almost do not argue on the sites. And Sasha was also the leader of tourist trips, had the qualities of a leader.

7. Put forward versions, do not discard the facts.
But no matter what versions we consider, we must not forget about the main fact that stirred and intrigued the public. And, ultimately, I was not left indifferent to that long history. The faces of the victims were unnaturally orange. On the Internet, you will find disputes and forums about the name of the color. The color of the skin of the victims was named to me in childhood and it was orange, not brown and not burgundy red. Most likely, everyone had such a skin color, but it was the first five tourists found and buried that attracted the attention of the public (a large number of people).
On the Internet, you will find many different judgments about the skin color of the deceased, they say, search engines and people who came to the funeral could not correctly describe the skin color, because they did not deal with frozen people, had no experience and the skin color of a frozen person might seem unnatural to them. but in fact it is natural and normal, and the point here is not poisoning, not radiation. But I think that on the contrary, there were such people among those who came to the funeral who were well acquainted with how frozen people look, they were surprised by the unnatural skin color, and so much surprised that after 17 years, in the story told to me, this was the most important and frightening fact.

There are several stories similar to this one. The story of the tourist group Korovina (the tragedy on Khamar-Daban), where 6 people died and only one girl was saved. A group of the Moscow City Tourist Club "Spartak" in March 1963 passed the Chivruai-Lada pass in the opposite direction - from Umbozero to Seydozero (everyone survived). Sergey Sogrin's group also got into a "cold" critical situation in the Subpolar Urals. As a result of the night fire of the stove, part of their tent burned down - the group lost its home at night (everyone survived).

8. New finds.
I am constantly interested in new ideas on the topic. I see how people explore and find new ways to develop the investigation, how new facts arise, inconsistencies are found, new questions are born.
We found a document stating that during the search operations there was not one tent, but several. The document says - tents. It is also possible that extra people were found. They said that Dyatlov dragged his wife on him, and her arms and legs were broken. Kolmogorova and Dyatlov were found in different places. The student Nikitin is also buried next to the Dyatlovites.
Researchers find oddities in the photographs of those involved. I can attribute the oddities to the poor quality of the photos, but in some cases I agree with the researchers.

9. Non-standard versions.
Why do seemingly delusional versions arise? Because there is nothing to explain the injuries of the three tourists (multiple fractures).
While watching films, I came across non-standard ideas that talked about experiments on humans. An American film about the Dyatlov group deals with this topic. Everyone who has seen the film talks about the stupidity of the storyline. I do not think so. I was a reader and the first fantastic works do not seem so fantastic to me: "The Head of Professor Dowell" (1925), "The Amphibian Man" (1927), "Heart of a Dog" (1925). Do you know what these works were about? They were about experiments on humans. The main part of the storyline was built on the fact that hybrids of humans and animals escaped from the experimenter and lived their lives as they wanted.
Not a single fiction is born from scratch, a person is not capable of inventing anything, I know that for sure. Experiments on people were carried out in concentration camps, during the Second World War, and then were carried out in the USSR, but they were classified. If you are interested in this topic, you will find articles about experiments on people in the gulag camps (not to watch for the faint of heart, I watched the video, was shocked by what I saw). It is about such experiments that the American film speaks. This film suggests that the Dyatlovites stumbled upon a secret base where such experiments were carried out. Nonsense? Don't tell. The Americans put forward a very bold version (and, perhaps, they knew more than ours). This is not an anomalous version, not parallel worlds, not fairy elves and giants. These were experiments on combining humans and animals (monkeys), the severed head of a dog lived, connected to devices with blood circulation, some dogs were sewn to others, and the corpses of dead people were revived. I don’t want to believe in such versions, it’s better, they were blown away by the wind, and then thrown and thrown over the mountain until everyone died.
Where is the base that the tourists sneaked into? In Mount Otorten. And not at the Dyatlov pass. It is there that no one is looking, it is there that you need to go to look.

10. Staging.
AND latest version - everything connected with the Dyatlov case is staging. In a country where people were imprisoned for the spikelets collected from the field, people could be killed for a little accomplished, or because of the suspicion that they had done something that threatened the disclosure of state secrets. And then, when the riots began, they decided to stage freezing. Then, the people who were doing this did not particularly try. Therefore, there are so many inconsistencies in the case: confused clothes, strange position of corpses, no wounds on the feet, although they ran almost barefoot along the curtains, it is not clear how the flooring was made when there was only one knife, than they dug snow to make a windswept place, with the dates a complete leapfrog ... Woodpeckers reinforce a series of inconsistencies, stirring up interest in the case.
This business is an endless source of income. Thousands of articles, TV shows, videos.

I think that the search for the missing tourists was carried out on such a large scale and were classified because Georgy Krivonischenko was an engineer at a security facility in the Chelyabinsk region, where they worked with plutonium, a substance intended to create a nuclear weapon. Rustem Slobodin also worked there. It was assumed that the young people wanted to fly abroad and sell the secrets of the enterprise.
The more I read, the more mysterious this story becomes. All the more questions. After all, they are deliberately confusing us, and all important documents were removed from the case. And although these are, perhaps, accidents, there are too many of them in such a strange, complicated matter. And the existence of radioactive things is an irrefutable fact, things that, for some unknown reason, got into that campaign, but it is clear that if they were prepared for transmission, they were never transmitted.
In my reasoning, I do not want to hurt their memory, somehow humiliate or exalt one of them.
Bright memory to all those who died on that fateful day, rest in peace to them. A fond memory of all tourists who died from avalanches and other natural phenomena.

Reviews

There are too many emotions and few juxtapositions of facts into a single picture. Also on "prose" does not pull at all - the usual emotional statements without adherence to literary stylistics.
As for the Dyatlov case, there are more imaginary mysteries than real ones. The folk researchers themselves just have some kind of mania to look for riddles from scratch and fan the noise out of them all over the country. What riddles did they come up with ...
Investigator Ivanov named the mountain Otorten? Yes, when, thirty years later, a journalist found him to ask about this case, he did not remember a single name of the Dyatlovites, let alone the names of the mountains ...
Do the Dyatlovites have orange skin? Forensic expert E. Tumanov has long given an answer to this question: this is the usual "posthumous tan" of frozen people ...
Was radiation found? It was found only on the clothes of Krivonischenko, who was the liquidator of the Kyshtym accident - the very first man-made disaster in the USSR with the release of radiation, which occurred in September 1957. From the dead Krivonischenko, the Dyatlovites took off part of the clothes - radiation was found on it ...
The list of imaginary riddles could be continued, but it is simply huge in this article ... There is no desire to waste time on this.
Of all the real mysteries of this case, only one stands apart: the injuries of Zolotarev and Dubinina. E. Tumanov consulted with other forensic experts on this matter, and everyone comes to the same conclusion: Zolotareva and Dubinin have moved something. Something rolling on the chest from right to left, about 30 cm wide. In order to crush the chest, the weight must be at least 300 kg. Cars could not be there. But what it was is a mystery. And everything else is somehow explainable ...