Dyatlov Pass Forum
Theories Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: OLD JEDI 72 on July 24, 2025, 11:38:17 AM
-
There has always been a focus on the idea that the Dyatlov tent was cut from the inside, but after reviewing all the evidence, I no longer think this can be called indisputable. I think it’s just as likely the cuts were made from the outside, and the tent may have been inside out at some point, either before or after the incident. Here’s the reasoning:
1. Seamstress Observation
A local seamstress was brought in during the investigation and gave her opinion that the cuts were made from the inside based on how the threads curled. She was experienced, but she was not a forensic expert. This single assessment got repeated so many times it became dogma.
2. Tent Orientation Unclear
When the tent was found, it was collapsed and partially buried. Later, during transport and reconstruction in Ivdel and Sverdlovsk, it was manipulated several times. It’s possible it was inside out when examined. No one can say for sure the cuts observed were on the tent in its original configuration. That makes inside vs outside cut origin questionable.
3. Anecdotal vs Formal Analysis
Her comment was made as an informal opinion. There was no lab test or controlled examination that settled this question definitively. Investigators folded that opinion into the official version without solid forensic backing.
4. Rescue and Recovery Damage
The rescuers made multiple cuts to locate and recover items in the tent. Some of the cuts and rips may have been made after the incident. These cuts could’ve confused the situation or made it look like inside cutting when that wasn’t the case.
5. Knife Handling Patterns
Hunters and outdoorsmen know that you can get similar curling of material cutting from the outside depending on how the knife is held and drawn. For example, an outward edge pull or "skinning style" cut from someone standing over the tent could look like an inside slash. If you don’t account for how the tent fabric behaves under tension, it’s hard to make a call from appearance alone.
So who could have cut the tent from the outside?
A. Locals or unknown outsiders
There was some tension around the last camp before the mountain. Could have been a confrontation or resentment from someone upset about where they camped, maybe near sacred land. If the tent was in a vulnerable spot on the slope, someone could sneak up and slash it while shouting or demanding they leave.
B. Igor Dyatlov himself
He may have gone out to urinate and overheard mocking or complaining. Maybe someone said the camp spot was dangerous or mocked his leadership. He could’ve snapped and slashed the tent, yelling at everyone to get out and follow him to the woods where others had suggested camping. He owned the tent and had the authority to act on impulse.
C. Zolotaryov or Thibeaux-Brignolle
They were found more clothed than the others. It’s possible one or both had a confrontation with the group or were staging some kind of takeover. They could have cut the tent to cause panic or take control of the situation. Zolo had military training and might’ve acted decisively.
The idea that they "fled in a panic" has never sat well with me. Look at the footprints for one. If the tent was cut from the outside, it changes the tone of the whole event. It shifts the incident from fear of natural danger to confrontation, either from within the group or from outside.
The tent condition is one of the biggest keys to the entire mystery. The evidence does not justify locking in one answer yet. Anyone else see signs in the photos that the tent could’ve been inside out? I’m especially curious about seam lines, flap positions, and how the cuts line up with the known layout.
Plenty of speculation, yes, but that’s all we’ve got with this case.
Thoughts?
(https://i.ibb.co/BHMkfmbf/Dyatlov-pass-tent-cuts-05.png) (https://imgbb.com/)
-
There has always been a focus on the idea that the Dyatlov tent was cut from the inside, but after reviewing all the evidence, I no longer think this can be called indisputable. I think it’s just as likely the cuts were made from the outside, and the tent may have been inside out at some point, either before or after the incident. Here’s the reasoning:
1. Seamstress Observation
A local seamstress was brought in during the investigation and gave her opinion that the cuts were made from the inside based on how the threads curled. She was experienced, but she was not a forensic expert. This single assessment got repeated so many times it became dogma.
2. Tent Orientation Unclear
When the tent was found, it was collapsed and partially buried. Later, during transport and reconstruction in Ivdel and Sverdlovsk, it was manipulated several times. It’s possible it was inside out when examined. No one can say for sure the cuts observed were on the tent in its original configuration. That makes inside vs outside cut origin questionable.
3. Anecdotal vs Formal Analysis
Her comment was made as an informal opinion. There was no lab test or controlled examination that settled this question definitively. Investigators folded that opinion into the official version without solid forensic backing.
4. Rescue and Recovery Damage
The rescuers made multiple cuts to locate and recover items in the tent. Some of the cuts and rips may have been made after the incident. These cuts could’ve confused the situation or made it look like inside cutting when that wasn’t the case.
5. Knife Handling Patterns
Hunters and outdoorsmen know that you can get similar curling of material cutting from the outside depending on how the knife is held and drawn. For example, an outward edge pull or "skinning style" cut from someone standing over the tent could look like an inside slash. If you don’t account for how the tent fabric behaves under tension, it’s hard to make a call from appearance alone.
So who could have cut the tent from the outside?
A. Locals or unknown outsiders
There was some tension around the last camp before the mountain. Could have been a confrontation or resentment from someone upset about where they camped, maybe near sacred land. If the tent was in a vulnerable spot on the slope, someone could sneak up and slash it while shouting or demanding they leave.
B. Igor Dyatlov himself
He may have gone out to urinate and overheard mocking or complaining. Maybe someone said the camp spot was dangerous or mocked his leadership. He could’ve snapped and slashed the tent, yelling at everyone to get out and follow him to the woods where others had suggested camping. He owned the tent and had the authority to act on impulse.
C. Zolotaryov or Thibeaux-Brignolle
They were found more clothed than the others. It’s possible one or both had a confrontation with the group or were staging some kind of takeover. They could have cut the tent to cause panic or take control of the situation. Zolo had military training and might’ve acted decisively.
The idea that they "fled in a panic" has never sat well with me. Look at the footprints for one. If the tent was cut from the outside, it changes the tone of the whole event. It shifts the incident from fear of natural danger to confrontation, either from within the group or from outside.
The tent condition is one of the biggest keys to the entire mystery. The evidence does not justify locking in one answer yet. Anyone else see signs in the photos that the tent could’ve been inside out? I’m especially curious about seam lines, flap positions, and how the cuts line up with the known layout.
Plenty of speculation, yes, but that’s all we’ve got with this case.
Thoughts?
(https://i.ibb.co/BHMkfmbf/Dyatlov-pass-tent-cuts-05.png) (https://imgbb.com/)
Lots of good questions OJ..
Here's my take on things..
As I understand, there were many cuts to the tent. This is not contested by the investigation, however, the investigation concentrates on the cuts from the inside , not the cuts from the outside, which to me means there were cuts from both sides.
Regarding the concept that the tent was pitched inside out, I don't think so, reason being, the loops and attachments for guy lines etc are on the outside of tents, especially older canvas tents , also the stitching of various parts of the tent at the apex etc are stitched to stop ingress of water, it would be obvious.
Regarding the seamstress, I think she was the first to propose that it was cut from the inside, it was from that they had a closer look at the cuts.
The complications of these cuts lie in the fact that there are scratches in the canvas before it penetrated the cut line .. I assume this must be the same for the outer cuts.
As I understand, these cuts were forensically looked at after the seemstres highlighted her observation. It was not all the cuts to the tent.
For me , looking at all the data , it looks like they had to cut their way out, couldn't take any other equipment and made their way to the treeline.
?
-
(https://i.ibb.co/BHMkfmbf/Dyatlov-pass-tent-cuts-05.png) (https://imgbb.com/)
Looking at this image, it strikes me that these cuts do not indicate a "fast" way to get out of the tent. It might be faster to just unbutton the entrance. It actually looks like the tent was deliberately and methodically cut up.
-
There has always been a focus on the idea that the Dyatlov tent was cut from the inside, but after reviewing all the evidence, I no longer think this can be called indisputable. I think it’s just as likely the cuts were made from the outside, and the tent may have been inside out at some point, either before or after the incident. Here’s the reasoning:
1. Seamstress Observation
A local seamstress was brought in during the investigation and gave her opinion that the cuts were made from the inside based on how the threads curled. She was experienced, but she was not a forensic expert. This single assessment got repeated so many times it became dogma.
2. Tent Orientation Unclear
When the tent was found, it was collapsed and partially buried. Later, during transport and reconstruction in Ivdel and Sverdlovsk, it was manipulated several times. It’s possible it was inside out when examined. No one can say for sure the cuts observed were on the tent in its original configuration. That makes inside vs outside cut origin questionable.
3. Anecdotal vs Formal Analysis
Her comment was made as an informal opinion. There was no lab test or controlled examination that settled this question definitively. Investigators folded that opinion into the official version without solid forensic backing.
4. Rescue and Recovery Damage
The rescuers made multiple cuts to locate and recover items in the tent. Some of the cuts and rips may have been made after the incident. These cuts could’ve confused the situation or made it look like inside cutting when that wasn’t the case.
5. Knife Handling Patterns
Hunters and outdoorsmen know that you can get similar curling of material cutting from the outside depending on how the knife is held and drawn. For example, an outward edge pull or "skinning style" cut from someone standing over the tent could look like an inside slash. If you don’t account for how the tent fabric behaves under tension, it’s hard to make a call from appearance alone.
So who could have cut the tent from the outside?
A. Locals or unknown outsiders
There was some tension around the last camp before the mountain. Could have been a confrontation or resentment from someone upset about where they camped, maybe near sacred land. If the tent was in a vulnerable spot on the slope, someone could sneak up and slash it while shouting or demanding they leave.
B. Igor Dyatlov himself
He may have gone out to urinate and overheard mocking or complaining. Maybe someone said the camp spot was dangerous or mocked his leadership. He could’ve snapped and slashed the tent, yelling at everyone to get out and follow him to the woods where others had suggested camping. He owned the tent and had the authority to act on impulse.
C. Zolotaryov or Thibeaux-Brignolle
They were found more clothed than the others. It’s possible one or both had a confrontation with the group or were staging some kind of takeover. They could have cut the tent to cause panic or take control of the situation. Zolo had military training and might’ve acted decisively.
The idea that they "fled in a panic" has never sat well with me. Look at the footprints for one. If the tent was cut from the outside, it changes the tone of the whole event. It shifts the incident from fear of natural danger to confrontation, either from within the group or from outside.
The tent condition is one of the biggest keys to the entire mystery. The evidence does not justify locking in one answer yet. Anyone else see signs in the photos that the tent could’ve been inside out? I’m especially curious about seam lines, flap positions, and how the cuts line up with the known layout.
Plenty of speculation, yes, but that’s all we’ve got with this case.
Thoughts?
(https://i.ibb.co/BHMkfmbf/Dyatlov-pass-tent-cuts-05.png) (https://imgbb.com/)
Lots of good questions OJ..
Here's my take on things..
As I understand, there were many cuts to the tent. This is not contested by the investigation, however, the investigation concentrates on the cuts from the inside , not the cuts from the outside, which to me means there were cuts from both sides.
Regarding the concept that the tent was pitched inside out, I don't think so, reason being, the loops and attachments for guy lines etc are on the outside of tents, especially older canvas tents , also the stitching of various parts of the tent at the apex etc are stitched to stop ingress of water, it would be obvious.
Regarding the seamstress, I think she was the first to propose that it was cut from the inside, it was from that they had a closer look at the cuts.
The complications of these cuts lie in the fact that there are scratches in the canvas before it penetrated the cut line .. I assume this must be the same for the outer cuts.
As I understand, these cuts were forensically looked at after the seemstres highlighted her observation. It was not all the cuts to the tent.
For me , looking at all the data , it looks like they had to cut their way out, couldn't take any other equipment and made their way to the treeline.
?
Good points Ziljoe, especially about the guy lines and loop placement.
However, a couple of things might complicate that assumption.
First, the Dyatlov tent was made by stitching together two separate tents. This is confirmed in witness interviews and the case files. Igor was known for modifying gear to fit large groups, and combining tents was common in student expeditions. With something that custom, normal conventions for loop and seam placement might not apply. There’s a chance loops were repositioned or that some loops appeared on both sides depending on how the canvas was joined.
Second, even with a more traditional tent, flipping it inside out isn’t entirely impossible. It wouldn’t be ideal or comfortable, but with canvas you can still feed a ridge rope through a center sleeve even if it’s reversed. Eyelets, loops, and seams might require some extra padding or reinforcement, but a resourceful group like this could’ve made it work, especially if it was temporary or done accidentally during a late setup in worsening conditions with ski poles.
In other words, the loops and guide ropes being on one side doesn’t absolutely rule out the tent being inside out, especially if that tent was customized and possibly misassembled during recovery.
Note in this photo the empty eyelet that goes through to both sides and the guide rope appears to be in a sleeve.
Appreciate your input as always.
(https://i.ibb.co/CsTtFQbX/Dyatlov-pass-tent-02.jpg) (https://ibb.co/pr9Ppdfs)
-
Good points Ziljoe, especially about the guy lines and loop placement.
However, a couple of things might complicate that assumption.
First, the Dyatlov tent was made by stitching together two separate tents. This is confirmed in witness interviews and the case files. Igor was known for modifying gear to fit large groups, and combining tents was common in student expeditions. With something that custom, normal conventions for loop and seam placement might not apply. There’s a chance loops were repositioned or that some loops appeared on both sides depending on how the canvas was joined.
Second, even with a more traditional tent, flipping it inside out isn’t entirely impossible. It wouldn’t be ideal or comfortable, but with canvas you can still feed a ridge rope through a center sleeve even if it’s reversed. Eyelets, loops, and seams might require some extra padding or reinforcement, but a resourceful group like this could’ve made it work, especially if it was temporary or done accidentally during a late setup in worsening conditions with ski poles.
In other words, the loops and guide ropes being on one side doesn’t absolutely rule out the tent being inside out, especially if that tent was customized and possibly misassembled during recovery.
Note in this photo the empty eyelet that goes through to both sides and the guide rope appears to be in a sleeve.
Appreciate your input as always.
(https://i.ibb.co/CsTtFQbX/Dyatlov-pass-tent-02.jpg) (https://ibb.co/pr9Ppdfs)
I am not sure if a rope was passed through from front to back. It is quite a standard build . The tents are stitched and folded in certain ways for strength, to get it inside out would take a bit of effort . My understanding of the tent is that it has an over hang from the sloped sides like an eve on house . You can't set it up without it being in this rotation, it would be obvious, especially to the experienced hikers. You can see one of these loops and the over hang at ground level in the photo you supplied .
The tent has cuts from both sides , inside and outside. I think it was only three cuts from the inside and one of them may have been the same cut . That's one small cut and then a second long cut. Enough for people to exit perhaps.
-
I used my favorite research assistant to properly word my thoughts and use my preferred outline style (8th grade lol) on why a tent would be inside out in the first place. Remember they wore their clothes that way a lot due to dampness. And it was warm up until it wasn't.
Possible Reasons Why a Soviet Hiking Tent Might Be Inside Out
A. Mold and Mildew Concerns
1. Canvas tents could easily trap moisture
2. If stored damp after a hike, mildew might grow on the inner surface
3. To air it out or avoid direct contact with mildew during setup, they might flip it inside out
a. This would let sun and wind hit the mildewed side
b. Less smell or allergic reaction inside
B. Water Resistance Worn Out
1. Soviet canvas tents often had basic waterproofing
2. After use, the treated side may lose repellency
3. Flipping the tent might keep the drier surface facing rain or snow
a. Less about ideal structure, more about short-term benefit
C. Damage or Repairs on One Side
1. If one side of the fabric had tears or patches
2. Flipping could protect damaged side from wind or contact
3. Avoids putting stress on old seams
D. Misassembly in Harsh Weather
1. Pitching a custom tent in wind or snow may lead to mistakes
2. In low light, tired hikers might rig it quickly and incorrectly
a. Especially with a double-length tent like Dyatlov's
3. More focus on speed and shelter than orientation
E. Intentional Setup for Experiment or Training
1. Group was trying to qualify for highest hiking rank
2. Might have been testing alternate shelter strategies
a. Could include emergency drills or survival scenarios
3. May have chosen to rough it or simulate worst-case conditions
F. Accident During Transport or Recovery
1. Tent was removed from snow, examined, and carried
2. Could have been turned inside out in the process
a. No photos from discovery clearly confirm original orientation
3. Soviet investigators and helpers were not tent experts
G. Improvised Shelter Usage
1. Tent may have been used as a blanket, wrap, or wall
2. Inside out might have suited a specific use
a. Shielding light
b. Reflecting warmth inward if material behaved differently
-
I'm not sure how to quote one statement instead of everything yet.
"I am not sure if a rope was passed through from front to back. It is quite a standard build."
Not at all, it was two tents stitched together, hardly S.O.P. And here is the rope zoomed in. If you look closely, there is a sheath or channel which could easily work either way. Funny thing is, what if it was something as boring as a snow slab, but Zolo and Tibo were the ones that cut people out? From the outside. So many scenarios.
(https://i.ibb.co/22HtSSh/Dyatlov-pass-tent-cuts-01.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
-
I'm not sure how to quote one statement instead of everything yet.
"I am not sure if a rope was passed through from front to back. It is quite a standard build."
Not at all, it was two tents stitched together, hardly S.O.P. And here is the rope zoomed in. If you look closely, there is a sheath or channel which could easily work either way. Funny thing is, what if it was something as boring as a snow slab, but Zolo and Tibo were the ones that cut people out? From the outside. So many scenarios.
(https://i.ibb.co/22HtSSh/Dyatlov-pass-tent-cuts-01.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
Sorry, when I say standard build , mean standard to erect. It is an A shape tent , one , two or ten tents stitched together it's basically all the same and the chance to get it inside are low. It's the same basic tent design the world over is what mean.
I don't think it's threaded through the ridge of the tent ,although it could be done that way . I have some pictures that show what I mean by the flaps on the sloping side with the guy lines. It's these lower guy lines that would ultimately stop it from being erected inside out and I think the tent had a floor.
This below is from an earlier hike by some of the Dyatlovs .
(https://i.ibb.co/0RHMQscb/Screenshot-20250726-041109-2.png) (https://ibb.co/JwD7C3KJ)
These colour photos are from this year's winter trip. The are on the main Dyatlov website . There is lots of links to other websites where they discuss and argue as we do ! ( Honest)
Sometimes pictures can give us a better feeling or might get an idea going.
(https://i.ibb.co/d4XNg39W/Screenshot-20250726-035607-2.png) (https://ibb.co/Jj8YQbLB)
(https://i.ibb.co/B5L0g8LS/Screenshot-20250726-035656-2.png) (https://ibb.co/1tZF9HZw)
(https://i.ibb.co/TDttqPVy/Screenshot-20250726-035819-2.png) (https://ibb.co/BHBBKTXk)
(https://i.ibb.co/hxYfgrRg/Screenshot-20250726-040632-2.png) (https://ibb.co/XfY8W6ZW)
(https://i.ibb.co/DHfhh91B/Screenshot-20250726-040003-2.png) (https://ibb.co/S4wbbt6k)
-
The older tent picture of the group is pretty good, however I don't see anything that would prevent an "ambidextrous" set up. Inside out and rightside in. I had to think about it because you mentioned the floor. Some part of the tent would have to be open or slit in order to accomedate the flip and being that tent was modified it's entirely possible a section of it was "let out" in order to achieve the flip. I'm not saying this happened, but just what if? That simple detail would change everything if the cuts came from the outside.
-
The older tent picture of the group is pretty good, however I don't see anything that would prevent an "ambidextrous" set up. Inside out and rightside in. I had to think about it because you mentioned the floor. Some part of the tent would have to be open or slit in order to accomedate the flip and being that tent was modified it's entirely possible a section of it was "let out" in order to achieve the flip. I'm not saying this happened, but just what if? That simple detail would change everything if the cuts came from the outside.
Please excuse my poor drawing but the top picture shows the over hang that is needed to secure the tent in its correct inside / outside position. The bottom picture shows that the over hang would be on the inside. To me, this fact shows that they wouldn't erect the tent inside out , purely on the fact it couldn't be done.
I have a polish military canvas tent. It is made from two jackets so to speak , they were used by the Soviet Union from Ww2 , it can be erected inside out but it's a very different thing. Interestingly I used it in winter with no floor , it was warm , Warner than modern tents, it has one pole and six eyelets . I survived a winter's night quite well.
(https://i.ibb.co/BVF8kwbd/Screenshot-20250727-203505-2.png) (https://ibb.co/HD3mZX61)
If the tent was inside out , we would still have the cuts from the outside that we know of . Either way cuts were made from the inside. ?
-
This tent has been shown to be slashed several times from the inside. Each cut appears deliberate and extensive. The reasoning is that the gashes allowed for an unimpeded exit from the tent due to extreme emergency. If this is true, then why, in the name of all that is sensible does Slobtzov have to use an ice pick and rip a new hole in order to peek inside. It makes absolutely no sense! Further, the area where he cut the tent appears in the collapsed, snow covered center of the tent! The front flap was available. Why not call out Igor's name and open the front flap? Why not lift one of the several ripped panels and look inside? Some things simply defy reason. I suppose one would have to be there to understand. Could it be that the tent actually suffered damage when it was readied for removal from 1079?
-
Very good point, Glenn. It's almost like these guys slashed open the tent and then someone else prolly came up and was like "what the heck is wrong with you clowns?" His ice pick mark didn't have to stop there if the tent was folded over in that area. It could cause several holes. So rather than be shot by a crazy Colonel, they lied and said they found the tent that way.
-
This tent has been shown to be slashed several times from the inside. Each cut appears deliberate and extensive. The reasoning is that the gashes allowed for an unimpeded exit from the tent due to extreme emergency. If this is true, then why, in the name of all that is sensible does Slobtzov have to use an ice pick and rip a new hole in order to peek inside. It makes absolutely no sense! Further, the area where he cut the tent appears in the collapsed, snow covered center of the tent! The front flap was available. Why not call out Igor's name and open the front flap? Why not lift one of the several ripped panels and look inside? Some things simply defy reason. I suppose one would have to be there to understand. Could it be that the tent actually suffered damage when it was readied for removal from 1079?
It is quite a bizarre explanation for trying to enter the tent. The fact that he managed to retrieve so many things on the first discovery of the tent suggests that he had a good go of opening and ripping the tent. I'm sure he states in a later interview that he hadn't been instructed as what to do if he found the tent which sounds like an after thought .
In the photos of the tent in the lab for reconstruction, we can see the tent has a floor, also what I would guess to be white material that was used at the entrance and quite big holes on the other slope of the tent. ( We can see through to the rear wall of the lab).
I can only assume that the searcher's ripped the tent open like a cardboard box to look at the layout of the equipment inside. This might be in part due to the nature of the canvas being stuck and frozen for a month on the slope on 1079 , I don't know what would happen to canvas exposed like that but I could imagine it would be quite stiff. So rips and cuts might have been necessary to get inside and the main cut may have been missed on first inspection. It's about the only thing that makes sense for that amount of damage.
The simple narrative fits for , snow collapse on tent, cut tent to get out, tent is buried, move to treeline untill daylight , leave torch on slope to return, build den/fire /snow hole, major accident at ravine , exposure to environment kills.
Take one bit of that model away and I'm stuck.
Each bit of this mystery has its own mystery.....sigh...
-
If someone stands outside the the tent (think rescue party)and cuts into it, the cut will produce a pattern. Imagine someone facing the tent wall cutting away from themselves making a long slice down the side of the tent.
But, what if this same person uses a different method? Lets say they are outside the tent as described and they stab the knife blade into the tent and then pull the blade toward themselves while cutting down. It is the difference between cutting by pushing or cutting by pulling. Each method will have a microscopically identifiable unique cut pattern. The point being that the tent could be cut from the inside by someone standing outside.
What concerns me is that over time, wind will fray any loose cut material. That makes the direction of the original cut all but impossible to determine. So, either the tent was cut by the DP9,as we suppose and then quickly covered by a weight of snow, or the tent was actually cut up by the rescuers during their activities. We recall that Slobtzov cut into the tent with an ice pick rather than peeking in one of the several supposed gashes. Either way, the cutmarks will be preserved, but their importance is markedly different. I have no doubt the tent was roughly handled whereas the tent contents were treated with more deference.
-
I'm having more problems than usual.
In this link we can see the photos of the tent investigation. Who the did the drawing of the tent and cuts ? Where was it sorced from , it doesn't look like the original document?
https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-388-392
-
Ziljoe, thank you for your contribution. When I look at the drawing, I think to myself that the vertical cuts with a blade are something I would do to escape the tent. On the other hand, when I look at the ragged nature of the top and bottoms of the cut aways, I can not wrap my head around how those were made. Surely, they are not crosscut. For example, if I required a knife to slit the canvas vertically then it stands to reason I would knife again to finish cutting the material away. If there was no knife, or no time then could I rip the canvas by hand? Hand ripped material is certainly not going to look like that drawing!
My impression is that if the vertical slices were done in order to exit the tent, then the exposed side of the tent had not collapsed. Instead, the empty tent was beating in the wind intil the canvas ripped away. Weakened by the loss of material, the center,section collapsed under snow and wind. Slobtzov should have easily seen this.
The alternate explanation for me is the horizontal tears are due to rough handling or, the illustration and case file photos do not match. The drawing was done from a,description, not observation.
-
It says that the two big holes were missing the material that went there. It simply wasn't just rips and tears, but gaping holes. So where did the fabric go? I hate to say it but this photo almost makes it look like it was gored by a moose or game animal with horns and the fabric was carried away on its horns. But seriously, all jokes aside, it also seems to be a perfect mirror image. Like when I was in kindergarten and we would fold paper then cut a pattern and the mirror would occur on the other side. Those chunks missing imo were only cut once and were folded onto themselves when cut.
(https://i.ibb.co/9Hm4Fb6R/Dyatlov-pass-case-files-388-02-en.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
-
It says that the two big holes were missing the material that went there. It simply wasn't just rips and tears, but gaping holes. So where did the fabric go? I hate to say it but this photo almost makes it look like it was gored by a moose or game animal with horns and the fabric was carried away on its horns. But seriously, all jokes aside, it also seems to be a perfect mirror image. Like when I was in kindergarten and we would fold paper then cut a pattern and the mirror would occur on the other side. Those chunks missing imo were only cut once and were folded onto themselves when cut.
(https://i.ibb.co/9Hm4Fb6R/Dyatlov-pass-case-files-388-02-en.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
Sorry all, my problem is with the original source case files . I understand interpretations from Russian to English having mistakes and then being edited but I'm uncomfortable with original documents that seem to change.
This was a the picture of the drawing of the tent from the case files put in this forum a few years ago , i wonder which is the original?.
(https://i.ibb.co/LdjMfTQ6/Screenshot-20250731-155827-2.png) (https://ibb.co/jk0dFCVG)
It looks like someone modified it to look like two pictures of the tent stitched together when it was in the forensic laboratory. We can actually see through the tent to the back wall in the office with quite considerable holes in the other side of the tent also.
I can only assume that the three cuts are the only cuts with the indication of the marks being on the inside of the canvas, all other cuts, rips are post finding the tent. The searchers did allegedly drag the tent 700m to the helicopter but even then I doubt that amount of damage would occur in the way we see it in the picture.
I can only imagine that the searchers opened the tent in a crude fashion to see inside on the first or second day of discovery. If different searchers looked at the tent on the second day and the first witnesses weren't at the tent , I suppose the second searchers would suspect the first searchers had already made the cuts.
-
Things get lost in translation. If you do not see it first hand and if you do not have the necessary skills to communicate your findings, then a cascade of wrong headed, but well intentioned mistakes will happen. As an example, consider the images I offer. They both are of the same thing, namely, a sundog. The wood cut was created sometime after the event happened and was made from a description, not observation. Small wonder conspiracy theorists use the most far fetched explanation for what the woodcut shows. If Ziljoe is correct, then DPI investigators have been led far astray by inaccurate data about the tent. If true, it calls the whole method of evacuation of the tent by the hikers as well as the responsible handling of the salvage into question.
(https://i.ibb.co/QvXxKSJ5/71-Lwfi-NU7-ZL-AC-SX679.jpg) (https://ibb.co/tp31JjHd)
(https://i.ibb.co/pBtMQmQT/Sundog-Jasper-AB-sky-phenomenon-Jeremy-Derksen-jpg.webp) (https://ibb.co/jPcQzpzY)
-
This is certainly a truth Glennm.We know information is missing regarding all aspects of the case . There is also the difference in knowledge from today's perspective in forensic and autopsy findings .
I just want to know the original source of why these pictures from the casefiles have English underneath them and why there's 2 versions of the same picture/drawing . I protest at not knowing who did this or why and there may be bigger clues to a number of aspects to this mystery .
The recent mention of the strange defect to the P or Q type of the typewriter in the original case files as makes me wonder how much of the information is being manipulated. Having used Google lense to find differences from the pictures of the type written files , I found a number of USSR case files with the similar yellowing of the paper and same red , hand written sequential numbers in the top right of the document . They went back to WW2 and were about secret information,interestingly enough , these typewritten documents had the same defect in the typewriter. I can only conclude that many of these typewriters had this defect .
-
In this picture of the tent we can see the back panel of the room through the tent. It's difficult to comprehend why the tent was shredded so much after it was found along with the missing panels. I can only speculate that perhaps some of the canvas was used to cover the bodies when found or used in some sort of capacity in the mounting of them to the ski sleigh to drag them to boot rock. ( Makeshift rope?)
(https://i.ibb.co/ccBkT4SQ/Screenshot-20250801-151216-3.png) (https://ibb.co/jvNb4nPD)
-
Things get lost in translation. If you do not see it first hand and if you do not have the necessary skills to communicate your findings, then a cascade of wrong headed, but well intentioned mistakes will happen. As an example, consider the images I offer. They both are of the same thing, namely, a sundog. The wood cut was created sometime after the event happened and was made from a description, not observation. Small wonder conspiracy theorists use the most far fetched explanation for what the woodcut shows. If Ziljoe is correct, then DPI investigators have been led far astray by inaccurate data about the tent. If true, it calls the whole method of evacuation of the tent by the hikers as well as the responsible handling of the salvage into question.
(https://i.ibb.co/QvXxKSJ5/71-Lwfi-NU7-ZL-AC-SX679.jpg) (https://ibb.co/tp31JjHd)
(https://i.ibb.co/pBtMQmQT/Sundog-Jasper-AB-sky-phenomenon-Jeremy-Derksen-jpg.webp) (https://ibb.co/jPcQzpzY)
This is your interpretation, my interpretation would be of a nice sunny day when all of a sudden these tubes appeared that spewed out spheres. Does it ring a bell a quite well known appearance of motherships dropping smaller saucers from them. This being so makes the wooden picture absolutely truthful as maybe in those days they may not have paid any attention to a nice "sundog". Also I was born and lived in the UK and afaik there was no word for them, maybe aura .???. Was the wood thingy from about 1650 in Nuremburg.
-
.
-
These pics more than likely were done by someone on this site years ago. And I have done this many times. I dont have time to finish a drawing so I may post a half of my pic or typing and finish it off later. Then poof its archived and I cant touch it.
Sorry , this is not what I mean. That photo is what is being presented from the case files. The case files from 1959 , the original documents, any altercation must be mentioned if presented as original otherwise the whole case could be made up or fake.
-
I clicked your link and did understand you didn't care for them, Ziljoe, but whomever did this certain image said a mouthful. Because it would prove snow was on top of the tent or at least the tent folded over onto itself. The identical panels missing is a mirror image. That would only explain the first event. The second event narrows down to maleficence after that. IMHO. undec1
(https://i.ibb.co/4ZCJmkQR/Dyatlov-pass-case-files-388-02-en.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
(https://i.ibb.co/Pv7QSjdJ/OIP.webp) (https://imgbb.com/)
-
I clicked your link and did understand you didn't care for them, Ziljoe, but whomever did this certain image said a mouthful. Because it would prove snow was on top of the tent or at least the tent folded over onto itself. The identical panels missing is a mirror image. That would only explain the first event. The second event narrows down to maleficence after that. IMHO. undec1
(https://i.ibb.co/4ZCJmkQR/Dyatlov-pass-case-files-388-02-en.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
(https://i.ibb.co/Pv7QSjdJ/OIP.webp) (https://imgbb.com/)
It may be only teddy that can answer. The photo above, of the drawing of the tent , is under the section of listed as the case files . These case files are supposed to be photos of the original case files. That is it, no changing or modifying. It is as it was in 1959.
1). The photo of the combat leaflet was made to look like it was written in English but also has an original copy that was typed up in 1959 and in Russian in the same link.
2) the documents about the tent that you have looked at , is also written in English. Where is the original document in Russian?
3) the drawing of the tent picture was modified at some point to show the big gaps and not just the 3 cuts as we see in one of the drawings. Why are both drawings not in the case files?
4) there has been speculation that the case files were tampered with because of the type face of the letter P or Q and few other things in zolo's files . This includes his name popping up out of alphabetical order , not fitting in the lines of the draft and a number of other documents
The point being , someone is definitely messing with the case files . The question is , when?...... 1959, 1960, 1990, 1999, and so on.
I don't know if what I'm reading is actually from the true statements written at the time . I would like to believe so but there has been manipulation of the documents , any changes to official documents should be stated , when , where and why.
-
Ignore the above post. It would seem that someone erased the cutouts from the original photo drawing . It is the other way round. And the original photos of the tent have the Russian text written in the Russian selection button.
I'll get my coat..... Dyatov fever....
-
Without the actual tent to examine its a difficult one and therefore ripe for much speculation.
-
If you have torrents allowed, I can send you a link to a scanned criminal case.
-
I believe that someone stabbing the canvas from the outside and slicing toward themselves will produce a pattern showing a cut from the inside. I also believe that a cut edge will fray if beaten by the wind. So, if a cut can be analyzed at all, it indicates a rapid encapsulation of the cut, or a it means a recent cut. If the tent was cut from within by the hikers, which makes the most sense, snow quickly covered the damage when they departed. I also support the idea that rescuers may have knifed the tent for reasons that seemed good at the time.
-
If you have torrents allowed, I can send you a link to a scanned criminal case.
I think this group is criminal enough for the time being.
-
Quote from Ziljoe
[ Sorry , this is not what I mean. That photo is what is being presented from the case files. The case files from 1959 , the original documents, any altercation must be mentioned if presented as original otherwise the whole case could be made up or fake. ]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah yes now I understand what you are getting at.
Maybe an idea that "case file" images could be stamped somehow to show authentication. But even saying that, would images not of the general computer era have the data embedded in them ???. Then theres always copyright to overcome, so no I cant see that happening.
Must admit I cant remember what data can be gleaned from downloaded images. So would need to be a physical or watermarked image.Afraid its gonna be as is , unless members can come up with a better idea.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sometimes common sense isnt all that common.
-
Quote from Ziljoe
[ Sorry , this is not what I mean. That photo is what is being presented from the case files. The case files from 1959 , the original documents, any altercation must be mentioned if presented as original otherwise the whole case could be made up or fake. ]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ah yes now I understand what you are getting at.
Maybe an idea that "case file" images could be stamped somehow to show authentication. But even saying that, would images not of the general computer era have the data embedded in them ???. Then theres always copyright to overcome, so no I cant see that happening.
Must admit I cant remember what data can be gleaned from downloaded images. So would need to be a physical or watermarked image.Afraid its gonna be as is , unless members can come up with a better idea.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sometimes common sense isnt all that common.
Something like that but much damage could have been done long ago. I think they were using typewriters and film cameras . It would be interesting to know when the English written copies were made.
-
I believe that someone stabbing the canvas from the outside and slicing toward themselves will produce a pattern showing a cut from the inside. I also believe that a cut edge will fray if beaten by the wind.
This assumption was made by myself 13 years ago but I was ridiculed by 432 members or maybe just 2. Anyhow yes we dont see the holes made on the other side of the tent apart from this image and then only when its colourised. I wonder when the sample of the tent was taken as it sure appears it took a beating and then to be erected again.
The probability that pieces of the tent were used for bags to bring the bodies back to Boot rock seems quite plausible as the "rescuers" were mainly students.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sometimes common sense isnt all that common.
I could be misunderstanding the forensic tent report but there's obviously lots of cuts and tears and to be honest I have no idea what anyone was doing with it but allegedly it was dragged 600meters.
I think the argument about the tent being cut from the inside is because the tool being used to cut the tent did NOT cut the tent canvas . On the inside of the tent interior,It intialy scraped the dye off the weave , then started to cut the weave and then finally penetrated the fully weave . I think it's the start of the cut that the forensic team focus on and gives the clarity that some of the cuts were done by a blade or tool on the inner surface. 2 of the cuts suggest this .
However, that's not to say a searcher could be standing in a ripped part of the tent made earlier and put his hand inside the tent through an existing hole ( and there were many) , stab it from the inside and then pull it towards themselves.
-
I believe that someone stabbing the canvas from the outside and slicing toward themselves will produce a pattern showing a cut from the inside. I also believe that a cut edge will fray if beaten by the wind.
This assumption was made by myself 13 years ago but I was ridiculed by 432 members or maybe just 2. Anyhow yes we dont see the holes made on the other side of the tent apart from this image and then only when its colourised. I wonder when the sample of the tent was taken as it sure appears it took a beating and then to be erected again.
The probability that pieces of the tent were used for bags to bring the bodies back to Boot rock seems quite plausible as the "rescuers" were mainly students.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sometimes common sense isnt all that common.
I could be misunderstanding the forensic tent report but there's obviously lots of cuts and tears and to be honest I have no idea what anyone was doing with it but allegedly it was dragged 600meters.
I think the argument about the tent being cut from the inside is because the tool being used to cut the tent did NOT cut the tent canvas . On the inside of the tent interior,It intialy scraped the dye off the weave , then started to cut the weave and then finally penetrated the fully weave . I think it's the start of the cut that the forensic team focus on and gives the clarity that some of the cuts were done by a blade or tool on the inner surface. 2 of the cuts suggest this .
However, that's not to say a searcher could be standing in a ripped part of the tent made earlier and put his hand inside the tent through an existing hole ( and there were many) , stab it from the inside and then pull it towards themselves.
Dont forget an Ice-pick was part of their equipment, ( I think it was left outside) would be interesting to see the blade of this.
-
Dont forget an Ice-pick was part of their equipment, ( I think it was left outside) would be interesting to see the blade of this.
They can be found on Google. There is a picture of Zolo on the bus with it. They are not sharp like a blade , even the point and adze (rear) are dull , enough to rip if needed and I believe that a hole was made with the axe by the first searcher when trying to break through the snow.
Its also potentially in the picture of the photo of the collapsed tent at the bottom left of the entrance.
I am having trouble posting the image over but I think it's me not the site.
-
https://dyatlovpass.com/semyon-zolotaryov
(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Semyon-Zolotaryov-38.jpg)
If you look to the bottom left of the tent and next to the ski pole , the head of what might be the ice axe appears. It looks like the edge of the tent also but the shades don't seem to fit . Not that it matters in the big scheme of things. The recorded placement of various equipment seems to vary in the statements , especially regarding the tent . There is anecdotal evidence that equipment was moved before the final inspection.
(https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/1S-09.jpg)
-
Dont forget an Ice-pick was part of their equipment, ( I think it was left outside) would be interesting to see the blade of this.
They can be found on Google. There is a picture of Zolo on the bus with it. They are not sharp like a blade , even the point and adze (rear) are dull , enough to rip if needed and I believe that a hole was made with the axe by the first searcher when trying to break through the snow.
Its also potentially in the picture of the photo of the collapsed tent at the bottom left of the entrance.
I am having trouble posting the image over but I think it's me not the site.
Yep thats the one that Zolo is holding. A dull point with a flat heel. Supposedly had 2 of these and the saw in its cover.
Dont think Zolo is looking too happy about having a foot resting on his head. ( who is the mandolin player again). A Yuri I think.
-
Nope the tent was cut from the inside.
This is the only realistic option if we talk about a natural cause.
Rampaging Mansi.
Secret armies.
Yeti.
UFOs.
And to boot the woman help/investigator said it was.
The tent was cut when a fire they had lit due to the cold ,had the exhaust pipe unscrewed, giving off toxic fumes. The two people who had access to the knives used them on the tent to escape the fumes.
This is why it was cut from the inside.
The reason they left the tent instead of waiting and then going back in the tent is a different theory.
-
I believe that someone stabbing the canvas from the outside and slicing toward themselves will produce a pattern showing a cut from the inside. I also believe that a cut edge will fray if beaten by the wind.
This assumption was made by myself 13 years ago but I was ridiculed by 432 members or maybe just 2. Anyhow yes we dont see the holes made on the other side of the tent apart from this image and then only when its colourised. I wonder when the sample of the tent was taken as it sure appears it took a beating and then to be erected again.
The probability that pieces of the tent were used for bags to bring the bodies back to Boot rock seems quite plausible as the "rescuers" were mainly students.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sometimes common sense isnt all that common.
I could be misunderstanding the forensic tent report but there's obviously lots of cuts and tears and to be honest I have no idea what anyone was doing with it but allegedly it was dragged 600meters.
I think the argument about the tent being cut from the inside is because the tool being used to cut the tent did NOT cut the tent canvas . On the inside of the tent interior,It intialy scraped the dye off the weave , then started to cut the weave and then finally penetrated the fully weave . I think it's the start of the cut that the forensic team focus on and gives the clarity that some of the cuts were done by a blade or tool on the inner surface. 2 of the cuts suggest this .
However, that's not to say a searcher could be standing in a ripped part of the tent made earlier and put his hand inside the tent through an existing hole ( and there were many) , stab it from the inside and then pull it towards themselves.
The only problem with this theory (and others) is that you cannot stand up in this tent. As I have said in an earlier post you would have to be on your knees to have the power to cut the tent in one blow, a descent tarp would need a sawing motion. You would be having trouble with a modern razor blade type knife. I think the tent is a lost cause, we dont know enough about it.
Sorry , I have been unclear and it's not a theory as such. There are a number of ways to explain what I mean. A searcher that found the tent collapsed ( the tent is flat on the ground) could reach inside one of the cuts or tears or make a tear or cut , whilst doing so , they would step into the tent by stepping in the hole they made, the tent is not erect but still flat to the ground, the searcher could bend down and lift the canvas up to his waste , with one hand used it to pull the canvas tight against the erect pole or another searcher, he reaches in with his free hand that is holding a knife and press the knife upward into the stretched canvas , thus leaving the evidence and marks from the inside. ( Think of a sunroof in a car, you can't stand up in a car but you can stand on the seat directly below the sunroof and you are then standing in the car).
A half decent blade could cut a canvas tent and power is not a requirement, however, tension would aid in the execution of cutting the canvas ( think drum skin) , if the canvas is tight then it all becomes easier to penetrate and make a slice.
From the drawing in the casefiles , it looks like the two cuts from the inside are made from the entrance side of the tent towards the rear. If the rear 3/4 of the tent was collapsed under snow , then the 1/4 part left standing would possibly have tension in it for one of the hikers to cut from the inside .....or one of the searchers stood/ kneeled in a ripped part of the tent , pulled the canvas tight ( unless it was perhaps slightly frozen) , reached forward with one hand inside the tent and pulled the knife towards himself from the underside. No sawing motion needed.
The important part about the tent is the report about cuts being from the inside , it gives us an indication and a hint to why and how they left the tent . By following a base line for an explanation we can create a picture or sequence of events .
We haveTent pitched on slope in winter and snow , tent cut from inside , hikers walking down a slope with footprints left behind . Poorly dressed hikers indicating they had to leave equipment. A fire made with the quickest available dry wood source , ceder branches laid out at the ceder fire for insulation and a den built .
We have in basic timeline , leave tent , build fire and den .
-
Ziljoe I think we have always had that timeline, you may have to extrapolate on this..
One thing I can understand about your verse is that the searchers have ripped the tent on purpose. I am not agreeing with you on the whole but suffice to say that the searchers did, I have read, shovel snow onto the tent to stop it blowing away. So the main pic we see of the tent is the result of the searchers after 3 weeks, suddenly decide to weigh down the tent because of the wind.
Well the tent was relatively intact, maybe a bit worse for wear, but still no doubt quite well anchored down. So this fact seems a bit dubious never mind its inventory being checked with everything in its place, not from what I have seen it wasn't.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Just thinking about the bottom pic with the clothes etc spread out. --- Has anyone seen anything of the removed clothes etc and the skis underneath showing the base of the tent.-----It would seem a bit obvious if a cover-up was suspected. For the conspiracy members amongst us, a pic showing the skis NOT there.
(https://i.ibb.co/XZws47X7/3-019-1.jpg) (https://ibb.co/hRqWMBsB) (https://i.ibb.co/ycrsYnBd/Whats-left.jpg) (https://ibb.co/mV3zXCFb)
-
ahabmyth, absolutely we have always had that timeline. I'm not sure what you want as this is the conclusion in the case files.
I believe these photos are a 1 or 2 days after the tents discovery. On the first evening of discovery , the tent was entered by those that found it, some items were taken and an initial search for bodies took place. How they entered the tent to take the items on the first day is unclear . What follows seems to be the tent again being entered the second day at different times by different people and the re arranging of the items inside. If the tent floor was attached to the sides and the tent was one complete piece of canvas I could understand why the tent was peeled open cut/ripped from above to look at how the interior of the tent was layed out it may just have been a practical way to access the scene.
The tent was covered with hard snow so obviously it had to be dug off the tent . There is no disagreement although I'm not sure what you find dubious. The north side of the tent was reported to have two snapped ropes which is why that end wasn't standing.
After the evening of discovery ( I think there was poor weather coming in) , it would be appropriate to cover the collapsed tent with snow to weigh it down ?.
Whether the searchers ripped the tent or not , I was trying to give another possibility as to how there are cuts done to the interior roof of the tent.
-
According to the testimony of the searchers who found and dug up the tent, they did not cut it. The examination indicated that on the inner side of the tarpaulin there are traces of a knife blade in the area of the cuts.
-
ahabmyth, absolutely we have always had that timeline. I'm not sure what you want as this is the conclusion in the case files.
I believe these photos are a 1 or 2 days after the tents discovery. On the first evening of discovery , the tent was entered by those that found it, some items were taken and an initial search for bodies took place. How they entered the tent to take the items on the first day is unclear . What follows seems to be the tent again being entered the second day at different times by different people and the re arranging of the items inside. If the tent floor was attached to the sides and the tent was one complete piece of canvas I could understand why the tent was peeled open cut/ripped from above to look at how the interior of the tent was layed out it may just have been a practical way to access the scene.
The tent was covered with hard snow so obviously it had to be dug off the tent . There is no disagreement although I'm not sure what you find dubious. The north side of the tent was reported to have two snapped ropes which is why that end wasn't standing.
After the evening of discovery ( I think there was poor weather coming in) , it would be appropriate to cover the collapsed tent with snow to weigh it down ?.
Whether the searchers ripped the tent or not , I was trying to give another possibility as to how there are cuts done to the interior roof of the tent.
Thats not a knife. This is a knife.
(https://i.ibb.co/qFsjGMSJ/Bowie-Knife.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
Ha! It was him! A good a theory as any.
-
ahabmyth, it all depends on the legislation of the country where you download. If not, I can send it via Telegram messenger. There are scans in jpg, pdf, attempts to translate the case materials into doc, fb2, but there are typos and inaccuracies.
Yep thats the one that Zolo is holding. A dull point with a flat heel. Supposedly had 2 of these and the saw in its cover.
Dont think Zolo is looking too happy about having a foot resting on his head. ( who is the mandolin player again). A Yuri I think.
There was only one ice axe. As for Zolotarev's discontent, the Russians (and some other nations) have a saying "in close quarters, but not offended." That is, even if it is close, but without claims to each other. There are things that are wild for the inhabitants of the USA, but normal for Ukrainians, for example. And vice versa.
Thats not a knife. This is a knife.
I also love "Dundee Crocodile". Krivonischenko's knife (apparently, they cut the tent with it) had a blade length of 15-17 cm. I made a 3D model of the knife based on available photos of Krivonischenko and the accepted unwritten rules for making homemade knives in the USSR.
https://i.ibb.co/MDYTBZHx/photo-2025-03-11-14-04-32.jpg
(https://i.ibb.co/MDYTBZHx/photo-2025-03-11-14-04-32.jpg)
The only thing is that the tip version could have been different - like on the upper knife
https://i.ibb.co/m5Yr8RGD/11.jpg
(https://i.ibb.co/m5Yr8RGD/11.jpg)
-
Some people collect Christmas tree toys, and some people collect knives or something else.
In one video recording, where Oleg Arkhipov talks about the Dyatlov Pass, there are knives hanging on the wall behind him.
I don't see anything interesting in the pictures of the green, red and other knives. They are rather faded, because they are old.
This summer, I bought a RINGEL knife for cutting bread and meat for 200 hryvnia, a modern elegant knife, for only 200 hryvnia (the price of 8 bread), in the next (adjacent) house. Quite a wonderful knife. When I chose it, I did not have much choice or hesitation.
Such a knife is needed. if the tent is made of sheet iron. Apparently, for someone, decorative knives are an object of passion (like vases). and the imagination arises that this is the kind of knife that is needed...
If the tent is made of fabric, then scissors are enough to cut it. A knife is not necessary. I prooved and checked it.
A sharp knife cuts instantly and does not leave such traces of the beginning of the cut.
-
Аксельрод, нож может быть острым, но само острие притуплено из-за особенностей эксплуатации. Например, из-за вскрытия консервных банок.
Axelrod, the knife may be sharp, but the tip itself is dulled due to the particularities of use. For example, due to opening cans.