September 24, 2021, 10:50:48 PM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: The military knew about Dyatlov deaths since Fev 6th  (Read 9835 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

May 22, 2020, 03:52:10 AM
Read 9835 times
Offline

alecsandros


Hello,
I recently watched Discovery Channel's "Expedition Unknown" documentary from autumn 2019. In it, at the end, John Gates is presented with two documents in Iekaterinburg - a letter dated Fev 15th concerning the deaths of the Dyatovlav group, and another related document, dated Fev 6th.
Does anyone have more detailed information about the contents of the two documents ? And of course, any info about the way in which the military found out so rapidly about the tragic end of the group ? (Not due to send a telegram until Fev 12th).
Best,
 

May 22, 2020, 06:08:00 AM
Reply #1
Offline

Nigel Evans


There is a "claim on the internet" that a team of geologists exploring the area in early Feb encountered and were interrogated by a police style unit before being released.
It all fits with the missile(s) theory which Askinadzi states was the official reason given during the search for the bodies.
Or it's all misinformation to confuse  kewl1
 

May 22, 2020, 09:28:09 AM
Reply #2
Offline

alecsandros


IF that claim was real, many mysteries of the Dyatovlav pass would be explained by military forces intervening.
After all, many (most?) "fireballs in the sky" appear close to aerial bases...
IF (again, if...) the nine skiers heard a turbo-reactor passing nearby, and/or a rocket (air-to-air exploding above them, air-to-ground being tested, and exploding near them, ground-to-ground exploding above them, or ground-to-air exploding above them), they would be in mortal danger and immediately rush out of the tent... They would use flashlights to guide their way down the slope, and into the woods, HOPING to exit the danger zone...
 

May 22, 2020, 09:54:54 AM
Reply #3
Offline

Nigel Evans


Yes the missile theory is the best explanation.
 

May 22, 2020, 10:42:07 AM
Reply #4
Offline

alecsandros


Do you think it's possible that the Dyatlov group was subject to a local rocket attack ?
 

May 22, 2020, 12:11:09 PM
Reply #5
Offline

Tony


Yes the missile theory is the best explanation.

What are the specifics regarding the missile theory? What type of missile? Was it just passing overhead or is the theory that it malfunctioned and landed near them? Where was it thought to be going? Where was it from?
« Last Edit: May 22, 2020, 12:30:08 PM by Tony »
"If there exists a fact which can only be thought of as sinister. A fact which can only point to some sinister underpinning, you will never be able to think up all the non-sinister, perfectly valid explanations for that fact."
- Josiah Thomson
 

May 22, 2020, 01:16:48 PM
Reply #6
Offline

Nigel Evans


There aren't any specifics, other than fitting the evidence.
 

May 23, 2020, 07:08:12 AM
Reply #7
Offline

alecsandros


Is there any area considered to be an impact crater in the vicinity of Kholat Syakl ?
 

May 24, 2020, 12:12:07 AM
Reply #8
Offline

WAB


Is there any area considered to be an impact crater in the vicinity of Kholat Syakl ?

No.
 

May 24, 2020, 02:48:15 AM
Reply #9
Offline

alecsandros


Is there any area considered to be an impact crater in the vicinity of Kholat Syakl ?

No.

Ok, thanks for the answer !
Further on the rocket:
Were there metal fragments recovered or observed in the area that could be coming from a 1959 rocket ?
 

May 25, 2020, 02:22:15 PM
Reply #10
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
There aren't any specifics, other than fitting the evidence.

And there really is no evidence to suggest it was a Missile or similar.
DB
 

May 25, 2020, 02:24:10 PM
Reply #11
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Do you think it's possible that the Dyatlov group was subject to a local rocket attack ?

There was no Rocket attack. Local or otherwise. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest any type of Missile involvement.
DB
 

May 25, 2020, 07:09:59 PM
Reply #12
Offline

WAB


Is there any area considered to be an impact crater in the vicinity of Kholat Syakl ?

No.

Ok, thanks for the answer !
Further on the rocket:
Were there metal fragments recovered or observed in the area that could be coming from a 1959 rocket ?

Any conversations about rockets, spies and military men in this history as the reasons of all events are a fake. It follows from detailed acquaintance to district, conditions and logistics. Besides, to me it is the most easier for understanding, because I will be the expert in rockets (in particular), and not only in technical characteristics and a design, but also in the history of the rocket technics in Russia. All conversations on it are simply gamble in this theme, and the fragments which have been found out in this area are details of later rocket which in 1959 did not exist even in drawings. At that time there were no rockets which could arrive on pass therefrom where they have been really located.
Therefore, if yet have not invented a time machine, to speak about participation of rockets in these events it is not meaningful.

 

May 26, 2020, 01:17:00 AM
Reply #13
Offline

alecsandros


Is there any area considered to be an impact crater in the vicinity of Kholat Syakl ?

No.

Ok, thanks for the answer !
Further on the rocket:
Were there metal fragments recovered or observed in the area that could be coming from a 1959 rocket ?

Any conversations about rockets, spies and military men in this history as the reasons of all events are a fake. It follows from detailed acquaintance to district, conditions and logistics. Besides, to me it is the most easier for understanding, because I will be the expert in rockets (in particular), and not only in technical characteristics and a design, but also in the history of the rocket technics in Russia. All conversations on it are simply gamble in this theme, and the fragments which have been found out in this area are details of later rocket which in 1959 did not exist even in drawings. At that time there were no rockets which could arrive on pass therefrom where they have been really located.
Therefore, if yet have not invented a time machine, to speak about participation of rockets in these events it is not meaningful.
Thanks for the answer.
Keeping this in mind, do you think it was possible for a rocket/missile to have exploded in the air, but traces of it (remains, debris) were removed before the official search began ?
 

May 26, 2020, 01:53:37 AM
Reply #14
Offline

Nigel Evans


There aren't any specifics, other than fitting the evidence.

And there really is no evidence to suggest it was a Missile or similar.
Evidence for a missile :-
  • Orange snow
  • Orange powder on YuriD's sweater.
  • Tips of branches of trees at treeline burnt.
  • Burnt skin and burnt clothing.
  • Injuries consistent with lightweight metal fragment impacts on three/four bodies each unique but of a similar pattern.
  • Facial injuries consistent with chemical burns including eyelid tissue within the protection of the eye socket (Zinaida - autopsy stated abrasions?).
  • Strange orange/brown skin at funerals suggesting unknown delayed chemical reaction.
  • Mysterious night photographs of intense light sources.
  • Askenadzi stated that in 1959 the official story was "a missile".

 

May 26, 2020, 02:47:59 AM
Reply #15
Offline

alecsandros


There aren't any specifics, other than fitting the evidence.

And there really is no evidence to suggest it was a Missile or similar.
Evidence for a missile :-
  • Orange snow
  • Orange powder on YuriD's sweater.
  • Tips of branches of trees at treeline burnt.
  • Burnt skin and burnt clothing.
  • Injuries consistent with lightweight metal fragment impacts on three/four bodies each unique but of a similar pattern.
  • Facial injuries consistent with chemical burns including eyelid tissue within the protection of the eye socket (Zinaida - autopsy stated abrasions?).
  • Strange orange/brown skin at funerals suggesting unknown delayed chemical reaction.
  • Mysterious night photographs of intense light sources.
  • Askenadzi stated that in 1959 the official story was "a missile".
In addition to this, Ludmila's brother mentioned in the interview that he gave that he knew about a "metal ring" being discovered at the scene.
 

May 26, 2020, 05:31:35 AM
Reply #16
Offline

Marley


At that time there were no rockets which could arrive on pass therefrom where they have been really located.

WAB, I really appreciate your knowledge of the Dyatlov case.

Personally I think it was a missile test gone wrong that caused the death of the hikers. I believe the R-12 missile is a good candidate. According to my research  Khrushchev himself was present at the official launch of the R-12 Dvina at Kapustin Yar in September 1958. After the official launch testing continued well into December 1958. Apparently there are no records at Kapustin Yar of further tests in January, February 1959, but that might have something to do with the death of some of the Soviet Union finest. The operational range of the R-12 was around 2,000 km (1,300 mi). Distance (as the the missile flies) from Kapustin Yar to Dyatlov Pass: 1,700 km (about 1,000 mi).

To me it all seems to add up. What is your opinion about it?

 

May 26, 2020, 06:01:19 AM
Reply #17
Offline

Marley




Evidence for a missile :-
  • Orange snow.............................................................................no
  • Orange powder on YuriD's sweater................................................no
  • Tips of branches of trees at treeline burnt......................................hm. maybe.
  • Burnt skin and burnt clothing.......................................................no
  • Injuries consistent with lightweight metal fragment impacts on
    three/four bodies each unique but of a similar pattern.....................no
  • Facial injuries consistent with chemical burns including eyelid
    tissue within the protection of the eye socket
    (Zinaida - autopsy stated abrasions?)...........................................no way
  • Strange orange/brown skin at funerals suggesting unknown delayed
    chemical reaction.......................................................................no
  • Mysterious night photographs of intense light sources.....................you're onto something here  grin1
  • Askenadzi stated that in 1959 the official story was "a missile".........well, official stories heh

I still agree with your missile theory though  dance1
 

May 26, 2020, 06:45:54 AM
Reply #18
Offline

Marley


Thanks for the answer.
Keeping this in mind, do you think it was possible for a rocket/missile to have exploded in the air, but traces of it (remains, debris) were removed before the official search began ?

During WWII the allied forces realized that a blast wave caused 90% of an explosion's destruction. To maximize the impact of a blast wave they set out to design bombs and other devices that would detonate not on impact but while still up in the air. Both Little Boy and Fat Man detonated about 600 m above ground and we all know what happened to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

A theatre ballistic missile like the R-12 was designed to do the same thing. A rudimentary on board computer processed the data of some equally rudimentary measurement devices (velocity, acceleration, angle, orientation) and at the right moment at the right (hopefully) location (600 m above ground) it would order the warhead to detonate.

In addition: the R-12 was a single stage rocket. At the right coordinates/time small explosive charges would blow up the clamps of the warhead. The warhead would travel on, on its intended course while the missile itself would fall away, fall to earth, quite a long way from the Dyatlov Pass, and possibly even burn up due to atmospheric friction.

If this happened there is no reason to expect debris on site, and there won't be an impact crater.

 

May 26, 2020, 08:40:25 AM
Reply #19
Offline

alecsandros


Thanks for the answer.
Keeping this in mind, do you think it was possible for a rocket/missile to have exploded in the air, but traces of it (remains, debris) were removed before the official search began ?

During WWII the allied forces realized that a blast wave caused 90% of an explosion's destruction. To maximize the impact of a blast wave they set out to design bombs and other devices that would detonate not on impact but while still up in the air. Both Little Boy and Fat Man detonated about 600 m above ground and we all know what happened to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

A theatre ballistic missile like the R-12 was designed to do the same thing. A rudimentary on board computer processed the data of some equally rudimentary measurement devices (velocity, acceleration, angle, orientation) and at the right moment at the right (hopefully) location (600 m above ground) it would order the warhead to detonate.

In addition: the R-12 was a single stage rocket. At the right coordinates/time small explosive charges would blow up the clamps of the warhead. The warhead would travel on, on its intended course while the missile itself would fall away, fall to earth, quite a long way from the Dyatlov Pass, and possibly even burn up due to atmospheric friction.

If this happened there is no reason to expect debris on site, and there won't be an impact crater.
Hello and thanks for your answer !
Still, if the warhead would be ejected from the body of the rocket, after which it would explode at a given altitude above ground, wouldn't some traces of the warhead itself (debris) be able to still exist and be found ?
 

May 26, 2020, 09:29:22 AM
Reply #20
Offline

Nigel Evans




Evidence for a missile :-
  • Orange snow.............................................................................no
  • Orange powder on YuriD's sweater................................................no
  • Tips of branches of trees at treeline burnt......................................hm. maybe.
  • Burnt skin and burnt clothing.......................................................no
  • Injuries consistent with lightweight metal fragment impacts on
    three/four bodies each unique but of a similar pattern.....................no
  • Facial injuries consistent with chemical burns including eyelid
    tissue within the protection of the eye socket
    (Zinaida - autopsy stated abrasions?)...........................................no way
  • Strange orange/brown skin at funerals suggesting unknown delayed
    chemical reaction.......................................................................no
  • Mysterious night photographs of intense light sources.....................you're onto something here  grin1
  • Askenadzi stated that in 1959 the official story was "a missile".........well, official stories heh

I still agree with your missile theory though  dance1

Hi, it's good that you agree with the solution, but disagreeing with the case less so.  kewl1
Would you care to expand on just "no"/"no way"?

Regards.
 

May 26, 2020, 10:42:45 AM
Reply #21
Offline

Tony


Evidence for a missile :-
  • Orange snow
  • Orange powder on YuriD's sweater.
  • Tips of branches of trees at treeline burnt.
  • Burnt skin and burnt clothing.
  • Injuries consistent with lightweight metal fragment impacts on three/four bodies each unique but of a similar pattern.
  • Facial injuries consistent with chemical burns including eyelid tissue within the protection of the eye socket (Zinaida - autopsy stated abrasions?).
  • Strange orange/brown skin at funerals suggesting unknown delayed chemical reaction.
  • Mysterious night photographs of intense light sources.
  • Askenadzi stated that in 1959 the official story was "a missile".

- Wasn't the orange snow determined to be snow bloom? If not, could it have been snow bloom? Why would only a missile leave orange snow?
- I can't find anything regarding orange powder on Yuri D's sweater. Not saying there wasn't but, could it be something other than a missile?
- Not 100% sure on this - Ivanov testified of the burnt treeline but it wasn't until 2013 that this information was made available. He stated that they found the burnt trees in May with Maslennikov (Maslennikov didn't go to the pass in May). They did not find the burnt trees during the initial investigations in Late February.
- Burnt skin and burnt clothing were almost certainly from the fire they built at the cedar
- If the injuries were consistent with lightweight metal fragment impacts wouldn't they have found lightweight metal fragments in the area? If not in the area, certainly in the bodies. What is it about those injuries that they could have only been caused by metal fragment impact?
- I couldn't find anything in the official autopsy reports regarding chemical burns
- https://dyatlovpass.com/orange?rbid=18461
- Not sure what photographs you're referring to. If you're referring to frame No. 34 on Krivonischenko's camera I thought it was determined that that particular photo was taken by the lab tech in order to rewind the film.
- ?


"If there exists a fact which can only be thought of as sinister. A fact which can only point to some sinister underpinning, you will never be able to think up all the non-sinister, perfectly valid explanations for that fact."
- Josiah Thomson
 

May 26, 2020, 11:26:02 AM
Reply #22
Offline

Nigel Evans



- Wasn't the orange snow determined to be snow bloom? If not, could it have been snow bloom? Why would only a missile leave orange snow? Snow bloom is red not orange. Combined with snow it is pink. Only pink no other colour.
- I can't find anything regarding orange powder on Yuri D's sweater. Not saying there wasn't but, could it be something other than a missile? It's in a recent article posted by Teddy containing a quote from YuriD's brother.
- Not 100% sure on this - Ivanov testified of the burnt treeline but it wasn't until 2013 that this information was made available. He stated that they found the burnt trees in May with Maslennikov (Maslennikov didn't go to the pass in May). They did not find the burnt trees during the initial investigations in Late February. Ivanov included this in his Leninsky Put article, circa 1990.
- Burnt skin and burnt clothing were almost certainly from the fire they built at the cedar - It's good to be certain, i'm not. We agree to disagree.
- If the injuries were consistent with lightweight metal fragment impacts wouldn't they have found lightweight metal fragments in the area? If not in the area, certainly in the bodies. What is it about those injuries that they could have only been caused by metal fragment impact? That's my explanation for three or four bodies having similar marks.
- I couldn't find anything in the official autopsy reports regarding chemical burns, No and you'll find no analysis of Lyudmila's missing tongue etc etc. Zinaida's face is described as "abrasions" including the right eyelid protected by the eye socket. She was found "face in blood" those bleeding abrasions show no direction of scrape. Google  image "chemical peel burn" for comparison.
- https://dyatlovpass.com/orange?rbid=18461
- Not sure what photographs you're referring to. Plane2 If you're referring to frame No. 34 on Krivonischenko's camera I thought it was determined that that particular photo was taken by the lab tech in order to rewind the film.
- ?
 

May 26, 2020, 12:45:33 PM
Reply #23
Offline

WAB


..........................................

Keeping this in mind, do you think it was possible for a rocket/missile to have exploded in the air, but traces of it (remains, debris) were removed before the official search began ?

No. It is not meaningful if analyze humdrum of life, instead of imaginations. Besides, on place there are no signs of that there that arrived, blew up, scattered and etc.
Fragments of the fallen rockets (or planes) cannot be collected completely. Especially it is essential to winter. At tests collect not all fragments but only those parts which can give lot of information that was faulty or fix the necessary parametres of flight. The rest leave on place. If only ecologists do not begin the company, but it in 1959 was not even in the project. Fragments fall on specially allocated platforms in most cases. Not settlement falling happen very seldom.
 

May 26, 2020, 12:52:02 PM
Reply #24
Offline

WAB


At that time there were no rockets which could arrive on pass therefrom where they have been really located.

WAB, I really appreciate your knowledge of the Dyatlov case.

Personally I think it was a missile test gone wrong that caused the death of the hikers. I believe the R-12 missile is a good candidate.

Unfortunately you here completely are mistaken.
1. Tests are spent on special ranges with presence of equipment for record, cinema shooting, radar and special measurements. To do it on unprepared platform it is equivalent to how it is imagined by children: take the biggest stone and throw to big pool.
2. R-12 during this period was not available anywhere. The cycle of tests has come to the end in December, 1958. At tests each following rocket do specially and individually, for this purpose, what eliminate lacks of the previous tests. While there is no new task of the new do not do are not matches, it very expensively and demands many work and intelligence, what all to do simply so, without the purpose.
3. In it the period was not starts R-12. It completely corresponds both to the official data and memoirs of those who at that time was on range "Kapustin Yar"
4. 1959 therefrom was on February, 02nd rocket R-5m start to direction Balkhash Lake. But it is perfect other rocket which - could not reach there (range - 1200 km a maximum), - its place of falling have found on a proper place about Balkhash Lake. It I specially investigated in archive rocket wax at the desire Vladislav Karelin - the participant of searches Dyatlov group.

According to my research  Khrushchev himself was present at the official launch of the R-12 Dvina at Kapustin Yar in September 1958. After the official launch testing continued well into December 1958.

Yes, that such was, just when passed tests, but they have ended in December 1959 and to Dyatlov group do not approach by time.
By the way, you confuse of the NATO-coding for USSR rockets: "Dvina" it is for surface-to-air missile system C-75. The index for R-12 is called «Sandal tree».


Apparently there are no records at Kapustin Yar of further tests in January, February 1959, but that might have something to do with the death of some of the Soviet Union finest.

Naturally there are no these records because the cycle of tests has ended, and training of calculations for armies yet has not begun. The rocket has been accepted on arms in March, 1959 then have started to form a cycle of training of armies. I can tell to you by secret , during tests and training of armies was not casual death of other people. Self-liquidators of several degrees have rockets, therefore even at small deviation it blows up in air and if also it does not work, that is the radio command on blasting, but to it practically never used at test of any rockets. Such system (self-liquidations at the big deviation of trajectory) exists since German rockets V-2 (A-4) since 1943.

The operational range of the R-12 was around 2,000 km (1,300 mi). Distance (as the the missile flies) from Kapustin Yar to Dyatlov Pass: 1,700 km (about 1,000 mi).

Range has no value as demanded for deviation to pass deviation from planned trajectories so big that it is possible not o speak the rocket about it at all.

To me it all seems to add up. What is your opinion about it?

In life all is much easier and is more prosy, than imaginations. Therefore it is not necessary to think out superfluous essence,. All one can speaks more simple situations in life.
 

May 26, 2020, 12:59:16 PM
Reply #25
Offline

Tony



- Wasn't the orange snow determined to be snow bloom? If not, could it have been snow bloom? Why would only a missile leave orange snow? Snow bloom is red not orange. Combined with snow it is pink. Only pink no other colour. Why would a missile leave orange snow? Could it have occurred from something other than a missile? Is it possible that the eyewitness misremembered and described the snow as orange instead of red (light orange and light red (pink) would be extremely close in color)? Where in the case files does it even bring up orange snow?
- I can't find anything regarding orange powder on Yuri D's sweater. Not saying there wasn't but, could it be something other than a missile? It's in a recent article posted by Teddy containing a quote from YuriD's brother. Since there is nothing in the official case files regarding orange powder on his clothing, is it possible the powder was transferred to his clothing during the transport from the pass? Also, why is a missile the only explanation for orange powder on clothing?
- Not 100% sure on this - Ivanov testified of the burnt treeline but it wasn't until 2013 that this information was made available. He stated that they found the burnt trees in May with Maslennikov (Maslennikov didn't go to the pass in May). They did not find the burnt trees during the initial investigations in Late February. Ivanov included this in his Leninsky Put article, circa 1990. Still, 31 years is a long time to try and remember something.
- Burnt skin and burnt clothing were almost certainly from the fire they built at the cedar - It's good to be certain, i'm not. We agree to disagree.
- If the injuries were consistent with lightweight metal fragment impacts wouldn't they have found lightweight metal fragments in the area? If not in the area, certainly in the bodies. What is it about those injuries that they could have only been caused by metal fragment impact? That's my explanation for three or four bodies having similar marks. Could those injuries have come from somewhere else?
- I couldn't find anything in the official autopsy reports regarding chemical burns, No and you'll find no analysis of Lyudmila's missing tongue etc etc. Zinaida's face is described as "abrasions" including the right eyelid protected by the eye socket. She was found "face in blood" those bleeding abrasions show no direction of scrape. Google  image "chemical peel burn" for comparison. Would the medical examiner not have recognized chemical burns?
- https://dyatlovpass.com/orange?rbid=18461
- Not sure what photographs you're referring to. Plane2 If you're referring to frame No. 34 on Krivonischenko's camera I thought it was determined that that particular photo was taken by the lab tech in order to rewind the film.
- ?
"If there exists a fact which can only be thought of as sinister. A fact which can only point to some sinister underpinning, you will never be able to think up all the non-sinister, perfectly valid explanations for that fact."
- Josiah Thomson
 

May 26, 2020, 03:25:09 PM
Reply #26
Offline

Nigel Evans



- Wasn't the orange snow determined to be snow bloom? If not, could it have been snow bloom? Why would only a missile leave orange snow? Snow bloom is red not orange. Combined with snow it is pink. Only pink no other colour. Why would a missile leave orange snow? Could it have occurred from something other than a missile? Is it possible that the eyewitness misremembered and described the snow as orange instead of red (light orange and light red (pink) would be extremely close in color)? Where in the case files does it even bring up orange snow?Google image "red fuming nitric acid"- I can't find anything regarding orange powder on Yuri D's sweater. Not saying there wasn't but, could it be something other than a missile? It's in a recent article posted by Teddy containing a quote from YuriD's brother. Since there is nothing in the official case files regarding orange powder on his clothing, is it possible the powder was transferred to his clothing during the transport from the pass? Also, why is a missile the only explanation for orange powder on clothing? It fits the missile narrative, that's all.
- Not 100% sure on this - Ivanov testified of the burnt treeline but it wasn't until 2013 that this information was made available. He stated that they found the burnt trees in May with Maslennikov (Maslennikov didn't go to the pass in May). They did not find the burnt trees during the initial investigations in Late February. Ivanov included this in his Leninsky Put article, circa 1990. Still, 31 years is a long time to try and remember something. Imo the delayed reaction of the trees fits with chemical exposure. They weren't burnt perhaps more just died off.
- Burnt skin and burnt clothing were almost certainly from the fire they built at the cedar - It's good to be certain, i'm not. We agree to disagree.
- If the injuries were consistent with lightweight metal fragment impacts wouldn't they have found lightweight metal fragments in the area? If not in the area, certainly in the bodies. What is it about those injuries that they could have only been caused by metal fragment impact? That's my explanation for three or four bodies having similar marks. Could those injuries have come from somewhere else? I'm only justifying a missile narrative, not proving it. Other explanations exist.
- I couldn't find anything in the official autopsy reports regarding chemical burns, No and you'll find no analysis of Lyudmila's missing tongue etc etc. Zinaida's face is described as "abrasions" including the right eyelid protected by the eye socket. She was found "face in blood" those bleeding abrasions show no direction of scrape. Google  image "chemical peel burn" for comparison. Would the medical examiner not have recognized chemical burns? Probably but would he report them?
- https://dyatlovpass.com/orange?rbid=18461
- Not sure what photographs you're referring to. Plane2 If you're referring to frame No. 34 on Krivonischenko's camera I thought it was determined that that particular photo was taken by the lab tech in order to rewind the film.
- ?
 

May 27, 2020, 03:23:29 AM
Reply #27
Offline

alecsandros


Naturally there are no these records because the cycle of tests has ended, and training of calculations for armies yet has not begun. The rocket has been accepted on arms in March, 1959 then have started to form a cycle of training of armies. I can tell to you by secret , during tests and training of armies was not casual death of other people. Self-liquidators of several degrees have rockets, therefore even at small deviation it blows up in air and if also it does not work, that is the radio command on blasting, but to it practically never used at test of any rockets. Such system (self-liquidations at the big deviation of trajectory) exists since German rockets V-2 (A-4) since 1943.
Thank you for a detailed answer.

Another problem: in the interview that Aleksandrovich Dubinin, Lyuda's brother, gave, he mentions a "metal ring" being found on the scene, belonging (probably) to the C-200 (S-200) complex (air-to-ground missile with a range of 300km https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-200_(missile)#Description).

Any comments on that ?
 

May 27, 2020, 07:09:13 AM
Reply #28
Offline

Marley


Unfortunately you here completely are mistaken.

Thanks grin1

WAB, thank you for your detailed answer. You obviously know a lot about the case. I hope you don’t mind me asking some follow-up questions.

1. Official records sometimes disappear when they’re not agreeable to the powers that be. The memoirs of the people at Kapustin Yar at that time can tell us more. Has anyone researched in depth, interviewed those involved at KY in the R-12 program about those first months (Jan, Feb) of 1959? Do we know for a fact that testing ended in Dec 1958? Nobody swept a final test gone wrong under the rug? Do you have testimony on that?

2. I’m not sure if I understand you correctly, but are you saying there was an R-5M launch on Feb 2 at Kapustin Yar, targeted at Balkhash Lake? And you researched that one and ruled it out? That’s what you are saying?

3. On self-liquidators/self-destruct switches. The thing about the R-12 that caught my attention was its fully autonomous guidance system. It was supposed to find its way all by its self without any (emergency) input from ground/radio control. IMHO ground control would not have been able to blow up the missile in case of emergency. And its guidance system would have made the missile particularly vulnerable to integrational drift without the on board computer ever “knowing” it deviated from course.  What’s your opinion?

4. The one thing that bothers me most about the R-12 theory is the possible orientation of the missile’s trajectory. As far as I know test missiles from Kapustin Yar were usually directed east – towards the “empty” plains of Kazakhstan –the salt marshes of Tengiz and as you mention Lake Balkhash. Do you know of any missile test at KY directed north during the 50s, 60s?

Thank you so much!

 

May 27, 2020, 07:30:21 AM
Reply #29
Offline

alecsandros


3. On self-liquidators/self-destruct switches. The thing about the R-12 that caught my attention was its fully autonomous guidance system. It was supposed to find its way all by its self without any (emergency) input from ground/radio control. IMHO ground control would not have been able to blow up the missile in case of emergency. And its guidance system would have made the missile particularly vulnerable to integrational drift without the on board computer ever “knowing” it deviated from course.  What’s your opinion?
Further of interest in this matter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelsat_708 "On February 15, 1996, the Long March 3B rocket failed during launch, veering off course immediately after liftoff and crashing into a village near the launch site (probably Mayelin Village).[1] An enormous explosion destroyed most of the rocket and killed an unknown number of inhabitants.[3]"