November 25, 2024, 06:58:17 AM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: Sharavin interview in 2013  (Read 45134 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

April 09, 2019, 03:55:42 AM
Read 45134 times
Offline

Nigel Evans


Teddy provided me with this link to a question and answer session on a Russian forum in 2013 - http://samlib.ru/p/piskarewa_m_l/sharavinkontakt.shtml

Sharavin was a member of the first group to reach the tent.
I've picked up on the discussion of "snow circles" :--
Question: In one of the interviews you said that not far from the tents of dyatlovtsy a small platform of blown snow in the form of a circle was well viewed.  Do you think it could be a trail from a helicopter landing there?  Then you saw the helicopters landing and flying away many times, can you compare, they left the same traces? Or the snow was melted and icy, i.e.  as if melted.  But again in the form of a circle?
  M. Sharavin: As regards the area of ​​blown snow, this was reported in a telephone message from searches.
  The circle of blown snow was more than from the rotor of the helicopter.  Later, this notebook with a record of all messages from searches was withdrawn by "competent" bodies, the room was closed and the duty was discontinued.  This is evidenced by one of the on-duty then Galya ..., who made repentance, that is, a statement 50 years later.
So a circle of blown snow larger than the rotor of a helicopter, maybe perhaps from a much larger helicopter... maybe a Mil Mi-6 size of helicopter?... Or a snow equivalent of a crop circle = ball lightning?

Whatever it was very pertinent to what really happened as the radiogram reporting it was removed during the confiscation.

and later on :
A question from D. Levanov, a participant in the winter hike to the pass in January-February 2014.  The question is very simple.  Look at the photo, see how much snow piled on the tent in 10 days. (Naturally, the weather on the pass in 1959 and 2014 was different. It can be said that in 2014 the weather was clear with weak wind and no precipitation, it is a fact supposedly in 1959 there was precipitation, gale).  Dyatlovskaya tent, as we assume, stood on the slope for 25 days, i.e.  2.5 times more.  It can be assumed that the level of snow deposited was 2 times more.  Question: How different is the snow level on the tent and in front of the entrance?  Is the nature of the snow cover on and in front of the tent?  And again: where exactly was the ice ax, which they found, and how much was he sunk in the snow?  "... an ice ax, before entering the tent .." It would be great, if clarified, to remember exactly where the ice ax was: lay, was stuck in marked snow or in a recess right in front, about how much was stuck half, / 3, or completely.  It is clear that now it is very difficult to do this, a lot has been in his memory during this time.  But maybe ... And when they found him exactly, 26 (when they only found the tent and dug it up) or 27 (when they took pictures and skis were already moved) I understand that the questions are repeated, but suddenly Mikhail Petrovich will be able to clarify something.   M. Sharavin: Dmitry, Questions are clear.  First - It would be more usual for me to consider a snapshot of a tent if I turn the camera lens to the left. In addition, I lack the free space in front of the tent.  In front of the tent, I see a drop in the level of snow, which was swept away by the wind, meeting an obstacle in the form of a tent.  But this lowering of snow was also in front of the tent, where I lack the picture space in front of the tent.  So there was an ice ax, stuck in firn snow on the third part of the cutting.  A little further 1.5m.  A pair of skis were stuck together in the snow.  In addition, I see in the picture the fluff of loose snow, And we saw a circle of firn snow, and now in front of the tent from its left wall is somewhat larger than it was then.  And lowering the level of snow directly in front of the cloth was not.  We found the ice ax on the 26th and used it to free the tent from the snow.  We didn’t move skis on the 26th.  But in the photograph taken the next day and attributed to Brubnitsynu, these skis stand next to the front and rear of the tent.  We didn’t put skis there and it’s not clear to us who did it.  Moreover, on the 27th, Brusnitsyn could not take this picture, since he was at the site of the camp, behind the pass.
This sounds like the famous hot spot? Firn is an intermediate condition between snow and ice. Ball lightning?
« Last Edit: April 10, 2019, 11:46:06 AM by Nigel Evans »
 

April 10, 2019, 11:02:44 AM
Reply #1
Offline

WAB


Teddy provided me with this link to a question and answer session on a Russian forum in 2013 - http://samlib.ru/p/piskarewa_m_l/sharavinkontakt.shtmlSharavin was a member of the first group to reach the tent.

I've picked up on the discussion of "snow circles" :--
Question: In one of the interviews you said that not far from the tents of dyatlovtsy a small platform of blown snow in the form of a circle was well viewed.  Do you think it could be a trail from a helicopter landing there?  Then you saw the helicopters landing and flying away many times, can you compare, they left the same traces? Or the snow was melted and icy, i.e.  as if melted.  But again in the form of a circle?
  M. Sharavin: As regards the area of ​​blown snow, this was reported in a telephone message from searches.
  The circle of blown snow was more than from the rotor of the helicopter.  Later, this notebook with a record of all messages from searches was withdrawn by "competent" bodies, the room was closed and the duty was discontinued.  This is evidenced by one of the on-duty then Galya ..., who made repentance, that is, a statement 50 years later.
So a circle of blown snow larger than the rotor of a helicopter, maybe perhaps from a much larger helicopter... maybe a Mil Mi-6 size of helicopter?... Or a snow equivalent of a crop circle = ball lightning?

1.I am many times talked to Michael Sharvinym and he of all has once tine told about this circle from the helicopter. And it is from illiterate giving by Piskaroeva. He did not speak about any fireball and did not think at all.
2.I have read attentively all questions which Piskareva set to Michael Sharavin and рis answers in Russian and have understood that it is made very much not skilled. Almost on all questions negative answers or its these questions are given did not concern. It turns out that from all this interview it is impossible receive even few trustworthy information which is directed on studying of case of Dyatlov group, and the rest is conversations on "lyrical" themes. It is very characteristic for Piskareva, it very much not the competent person which tries receive answers to the complicated questions which essence she does not understand. I already wrote earlier: that who asks, should be more competent or equal on literacy of the one who answers them. The nonsense otherwise turns out that we and see in this case. The person who understands nothing in aerodynamics and operation of helicopters (and as did not see it close) asks question to the one who knows bit more because itself saw the helicopter and flied on it (as the passenger). The answer which is simply wrong representation that he saw (or in what its memory has been deformed) has as result poured down. Because it does not happen in the nature.
3.I already wrote in this forum that Mi-6 here cannot be present in any way. For February, 01st of 1959 them have made only 2 pieces, and one flied only. It tested about the Lyubertsy city (it is about the Moscow city).
4.At helicopter landing f any circles it is never formed. It is necessary have good knowledge of aerodynamics that it would be possible understand this elementary knowledge. I and more he did not tell it talk to Michael Sharavin and he never talk not never about it. He is metallurgist by trade therefore he could not understand it.
5.Galina Batalova speaks about phone records of conversations from Ivdel at very beginning of searches. As to me prompted modern public prosecutors with which we are discussed about case Dyatlov group, it could be also because for the period of carrying out of consequence the information on its course should be closed and it there could be prosecutors of Sverdlovsk who should watch observance of mode of carrying out of business. These workers should be from the deputy chief department Okishev was which.
But the exact information in view of that is not present therefore here there can be different variants. One is clear only: it not attempt that hide, and anxiety of chiefs (or Offices of Public Prosecutor, or UPI administration, or still what that) that the superfluous information would not extend. However it and so extended, because conversations between people cannot be forbidden.


Whatever it was very pertinent to what really happened as the radiogram reporting it was removed during the confiscation.

Was such radiogram never in the course of searches, therefore it and is absent. What it is never was cannot be gone.

**** - I would like ask participants of searches result only trustworthy information (which has authentic source or it is confirmed by documents) and analyze everything that they write on reliability. Otherwise it turns out that who that at first thinks out the next fable (or finds it in the Internet, especially in conversations between 3 … 4 interlocutors consistently), and then it should be denied. Otherwise all who discusses this theme will constantly go in circle and all will leave from understanding, instead of further what come nearer.

and later on :
A question from D. Levanov, a participant in the winter hike to the pass in January-February 2014.  The question is very simple.  Look at the photo, see how much snow piled on the tent in 10 days. (Naturally, the weather on the pass in 1959 and 2014 was different. It can be said that in 2014 the weather was clear with weak wind and no precipitation, it is a fact supposedly in 1959 there was precipitation, gale).  Dyatlovskaya tent, as we assume, stood on the slope for 25 days, i.e.  2.5 times more.  It can be assumed that the level of snow deposited was 2 times more.  Question: How different is the snow level on the tent and in front of the entrance?  Is the nature of the snow cover on and in front of the tent?  And again: where exactly was the ice ax, which they found, and how much was he sunk in the snow?  "... an ice ax, before entering the tent .." It would be great, if clarified, to remember exactly where the ice ax was: lay, was stuck in marked snow or in a recess right in front, about how much was stuck half, / 3, or completely.  It is clear that now it is very difficult to do this, a lot has been in his memory during this time.  But maybe ... And when they found him exactly, 26 (when they only found the tent and dug it up) or 27 (when they took pictures and skis were already moved) I understand that the questions are repeated, but suddenly Mikhail Petrovich will be able to clarify something.   M. Sharavin: Dmitry, Questions are clear.  First - It would be more usual for me to consider a snapshot of a tent if I turn the camera lens to the left. In addition, I lack the free space in front of the tent.  In front of the tent, I see a drop in the level of snow, which was swept away by the wind, meeting an obstacle in the form of a tent.  But this lowering of snow was also in front of the tent, where I lack the picture space in front of the tent.  So there was an ice ax, stuck in firn snow on the third part of the cutting.  A little further 1.5m.  A pair of skis were stuck together in the snow.  In addition, I see in the picture the fluff of loose snow, And we saw a circle of firn snow, and now in front of the tent from its left wall is somewhat larger than it was then.  And lowering the level of snow directly in front of the cloth was not.  We found the ice ax on the 26th and used it to free the tent from the snow.  We didn’t move skis on the 26th.  But in the photograph taken the next day and attributed to Brubnitsynu, these skis stand next to the front and rear of the tent.  We didn’t put skis there and it’s not clear to us who did it.  Moreover, on the 27th, Brusnitsyn could not take this picture, since he was at the site of the camp, behind the pass.[/i]
This sounds like the famous hot spot? Firn is an intermediate condition between snow and ice. Ball lightning?

I constantly should correct many participants of search because they constantly confuse terms "наст - ice crust" and “фирн -glacier snow”. Glacier snow on this place was not and does not happen basically. Because glacier snow is a long-term snow which does not thaw in the summer. Such snow on this place is not present. The ice crust in zone where there are no trees in current of winter happens very rigid and is often covered by crust which reminds ice. But it is not ice.
It is not ask only Karelin, Bartolomey and Budrin. All of them very qualified travellers also have degree of the Master. Many other participants of search have no experience of mountain snow and extreme ski travel, therefore and can confuse terms.

*) Dmitry Levanov was in during 1 day (2 or 3 hours) on pass in February 2014 for 1 or 2 days before as we have come there together with Shura. But we there were the whole week and at us other opinion concerning snow on tent and, why it such. I resulted earlier comparative photos of our model tent that day when we there have put it, after 2 days, after 2 weeks and through ? Weeks after. If I now find direct reference I it I will result, if I do not find this reference (at me not enough time for answers at forum) all can find it search in my messages in the spring of last year.

I have not found old reference, but now ladies others on 3 of 4 conditions of tent:

1.   


It is Shura prepares testing tent in Moscow before departure to pass.

2.   


This photo is testing tent after it have just established on slope of North Ural Mountains.

3.   


It is view to tent after 2 days there was blizzard.

4.   


It is view to tent after 2 weeks as its installation it  during February 2014.

5.   Unfortunately I could not find tent view after 1 month after its installation, but it only small differed from the previous view.

 

April 10, 2019, 11:30:41 AM
Reply #2

Clacon

Guest
Sorry WAB - are you saying you couldn't find the tent after a month in those conditions??
 

April 10, 2019, 12:50:56 PM
Reply #3
Offline

WAB


Sorry WAB - are you saying you couldn't find the tent after a month in those conditions??

No, I could not find only photo of this tent at myself archive.
This photo where that was gone in my archive during current 2 last months
 

April 11, 2019, 03:36:24 AM
Reply #4
Offline

Nigel Evans


Teddy provided me with this link to a question and answer session on a Russian forum in 2013 - http://samlib.ru/p/piskarewa_m_l/sharavinkontakt.shtmlSharavin was a member of the first group to reach the tent.

I've picked up on the discussion of "snow circles" :--
Question: In one of the interviews you said that not far from the tents of dyatlovtsy a small platform of blown snow in the form of a circle was well viewed.  Do you think it could be a trail from a helicopter landing there?  Then you saw the helicopters landing and flying away many times, can you compare, they left the same traces? Or the snow was melted and icy, i.e.  as if melted.  But again in the form of a circle?
  M. Sharavin: As regards the area of ​​blown snow, this was reported in a telephone message from searches.
  The circle of blown snow was more than from the rotor of the helicopter.  Later, this notebook with a record of all messages from searches was withdrawn by "competent" bodies, the room was closed and the duty was discontinued.  This is evidenced by one of the on-duty then Galya ..., who made repentance, that is, a statement 50 years later.
So a circle of blown snow larger than the rotor of a helicopter, maybe perhaps from a much larger helicopter... maybe a Mil Mi-6 size of helicopter?... Or a snow equivalent of a crop circle = ball lightning?

1.I am many times talked to Michael Sharvinym and he of all has once tine told about this circle from the helicopter. And it is from illiterate giving by Piskaroeva. He did not speak about any fireball and did not think at all.
2.I have read attentively all questions which Piskareva set to Michael Sharavin and рis answers in Russian and have understood that it is made very much not skilled. Almost on all questions negative answers or its these questions are given did not concern. It turns out that from all this interview it is impossible receive even few trustworthy information which is directed on studying of case of Dyatlov group, and the rest is conversations on "lyrical" themes. It is very characteristic for Piskareva, it very much not the competent person which tries receive answers to the complicated questions which essence she does not understand. I already wrote earlier: that who asks, should be more competent or equal on literacy of the one who answers them. The nonsense otherwise turns out that we and see in this case. The person who understands nothing in aerodynamics and operation of helicopters (and as did not see it close) asks question to the one who knows bit more because itself saw the helicopter and flied on it (as the passenger). The answer which is simply wrong representation that he saw (or in what its memory has been deformed) has as result poured down. Because it does not happen in the nature.
3.I already wrote in this forum that Mi-6 here cannot be present in any way. For February, 01st of 1959 them have made only 2 pieces, and one flied only. It tested about the Lyubertsy city (it is about the Moscow city).
4.At helicopter landing f any circles it is never formed. It is necessary have good knowledge of aerodynamics that it would be possible understand this elementary knowledge. I and more he did not tell it talk to Michael Sharavin and he never talk not never about it. He is metallurgist by trade therefore he could not understand it.
5.Galina Batalova speaks about phone records of conversations from Ivdel at very beginning of searches. As to me prompted modern public prosecutors with which we are discussed about case Dyatlov group, it could be also because for the period of carrying out of consequence the information on its course should be closed and it there could be prosecutors of Sverdlovsk who should watch observance of mode of carrying out of business. These workers should be from the deputy chief department Okishev was which.
But the exact information in view of that is not present therefore here there can be different variants. One is clear only: it not attempt that hide, and anxiety of chiefs (or Offices of Public Prosecutor, or UPI administration, or still what that) that the superfluous information would not extend. However it and so extended, because conversations between people cannot be forbidden.


Whatever it was very pertinent to what really happened as the radiogram reporting it was removed during the confiscation.

Was such radiogram never in the course of searches, therefore it and is absent. What it is never was cannot be gone.

**** - I would like ask participants of searches result only trustworthy information (which has authentic source or it is confirmed by documents) and analyze everything that they write on reliability. Otherwise it turns out that who that at first thinks out the next fable (or finds it in the Internet, especially in conversations between 3 … 4 interlocutors consistently), and then it should be denied. Otherwise all who discusses this theme will constantly go in circle and all will leave from understanding, instead of further what come nearer.

and later on :
A question from D. Levanov, a participant in the winter hike to the pass in January-February 2014.  The question is very simple.  Look at the photo, see how much snow piled on the tent in 10 days. (Naturally, the weather on the pass in 1959 and 2014 was different. It can be said that in 2014 the weather was clear with weak wind and no precipitation, it is a fact supposedly in 1959 there was precipitation, gale).  Dyatlovskaya tent, as we assume, stood on the slope for 25 days, i.e.  2.5 times more.  It can be assumed that the level of snow deposited was 2 times more.  Question: How different is the snow level on the tent and in front of the entrance?  Is the nature of the snow cover on and in front of the tent?  And again: where exactly was the ice ax, which they found, and how much was he sunk in the snow?  "... an ice ax, before entering the tent .." It would be great, if clarified, to remember exactly where the ice ax was: lay, was stuck in marked snow or in a recess right in front, about how much was stuck half, / 3, or completely.  It is clear that now it is very difficult to do this, a lot has been in his memory during this time.  But maybe ... And when they found him exactly, 26 (when they only found the tent and dug it up) or 27 (when they took pictures and skis were already moved) I understand that the questions are repeated, but suddenly Mikhail Petrovich will be able to clarify something.   M. Sharavin: Dmitry, Questions are clear.  First - It would be more usual for me to consider a snapshot of a tent if I turn the camera lens to the left. In addition, I lack the free space in front of the tent.  In front of the tent, I see a drop in the level of snow, which was swept away by the wind, meeting an obstacle in the form of a tent.  But this lowering of snow was also in front of the tent, where I lack the picture space in front of the tent.  So there was an ice ax, stuck in firn snow on the third part of the cutting.  A little further 1.5m.  A pair of skis were stuck together in the snow.  In addition, I see in the picture the fluff of loose snow, And we saw a circle of firn snow, and now in front of the tent from its left wall is somewhat larger than it was then.  And lowering the level of snow directly in front of the cloth was not.  We found the ice ax on the 26th and used it to free the tent from the snow.  We didn’t move skis on the 26th.  But in the photograph taken the next day and attributed to Brubnitsynu, these skis stand next to the front and rear of the tent.  We didn’t put skis there and it’s not clear to us who did it.  Moreover, on the 27th, Brusnitsyn could not take this picture, since he was at the site of the camp, behind the pass.
This sounds like the famous hot spot? Firn is an intermediate condition between snow and ice. Ball lightning?

I constantly should correct many participants of search because they constantly confuse terms "наст - ice crust" and “фирн -glacier snow”. Glacier snow on this place was not and does not happen basically. Because glacier snow is a long-term snow which does not thaw in the summer. Such snow on this place is not present. The ice crust in zone where there are no trees in current of winter happens very rigid and is often covered by crust which reminds ice. But it is not ice.
It is not ask only Karelin, Bartolomey and Budrin. All of them very qualified travellers also have degree of the Master. Many other participants of search have no experience of mountain snow and extreme ski travel, therefore and can confuse terms.

*) Dmitry Levanov was in during 1 day (2 or 3 hours) on pass in February 2014 for 1 or 2 days before as we have come there together with Shura. But we there were the whole week and at us other opinion concerning snow on tent and, why it such. I resulted earlier comparative photos of our model tent that day when we there have put it, after 2 days, after 2 weeks and through ? Weeks after. If I now find direct reference I it I will result, if I do not find this reference (at me not enough time for answers at forum) all can find it search in my messages in the spring of last year.

I have not found old reference, but now ladies others on 3 of 4 conditions of tent:

1.   


It is Shura prepares testing tent in Moscow before departure to pass.

2.   


This photo is testing tent after it have just established on slope of North Ural Mountains.

3.   


It is view to tent after 2 days there was blizzard.

4.   


It is view to tent after 2 weeks as its installation it  during February 2014.

5.   Unfortunately I could not find tent view after 1 month after its installation, but it only small differed from the previous view.
Hi.
So i'm reading from your answers :-
  • There was a circle and it was reported. But the disappearance of the record is not significant.
  • There was one operational Mi-6 based near Moscow approximately 1000km away.
  • There were two circles, the large snow circle and one of icy snow (incorrectly stated as firn) near the tent.
Some thoughts - All the theory needs is one Mi-6! Moscow to DP would be 4 hours flying time? If the mission made a big effort to cover up it's presence the one thing it couldn't cover up would be the blown snow at takeoff?
 

April 11, 2019, 01:50:17 PM
Reply #5
Offline

WAB



Hi.
So i'm reading from your answers :-
  • There was a circle and it was reported. But the disappearance of the record is not significant.

Whence you know, what it (circle) was then, if Michael Sharavin has realised, what he was mistaken in it?
And how record if it was not can disappear? I speak about record about this circle. I have explained it the rest earlier.

   
  • There was one operational Mi-6 based near Moscow approximately 1000km away.

There is distance on straight line about 2000 km. Check up it on good map. The modern plane with speed of 850 km/hour flies more than 2 hours only to Ekaterinburg (Sverdlovsk).
And this is small distance, on your concept? Especially it exists for pre-production model which only passes tests for flight possibility?

   
  • There were two circles, the large snow circle and one of icy snow (incorrectly stated as firn) near the tent.


Who has told to you about “two circles”? There it is not formed any circle if it concerns landing or helicopter launch. Here is picture landing of more powerful helicopter - Mi-8:


Show, where the circle here is formed?
This that place where helicopters in 1959 sat down. In other place helicopters there cannot sit down, because there are no conditions for this purpose.
This place is located ~ in 1000 m from tent.
Character of snow which wrongly (!) name “фирн- firn -(glacier snow)” it is well visible in the same picture.

Some thoughts - All the theory needs is one Mi-6! Moscow to DP would be 4 hours flying time? If the mission made a big effort to cover up it's presence the one thing it couldn't cover up would be the blown snow at takeoff?

1.Nobody will overtake any helicopter which only has started take place trial runs on any distance from test airdrome.
2.To place of events not two hours of summer, and it will turn out not less than 6 hours if competently consider flight route. For the helicopter which by that moment flew less than 6 hours, it is nonsense.
3.Who and what for tried hide there, it is not known for what purpose and with what intentions?
4.Traces from arrival and helicopter flying away there does not remain in some hours after it has departed. Under any weather conditions. There such conditions. What for that that to hide it is artificial, if anything and so does not remain?
I think that there is no sense further develop conspyrology theory, only for this purpose, what continue senseless conversation. I will not participate in it further.
[/list]
 

April 12, 2019, 03:17:36 AM
Reply #6
Offline

Nigel Evans



Hi.
So i'm reading from your answers :-
  • There was a circle and it was reported. But the disappearance of the record is not significant.

Whence you know, what it (circle) was then, if Michael Sharavin has realised, what he was mistaken in it?
And how record if it was not can disappear? I speak about record about this circle. I have explained it the rest earlier.Ok, i'm struggling with the translation. At the interview Sharavin confirmed his previous statements that the snow circle existed and was reported. But you are saying that since then he has retracted this?

   
  • There was one operational Mi-6 based near Moscow approximately 1000km away.

There is distance on straight line about 2000 km. Check up it on good map. The modern plane with speed of 850 km/hour flies more than 2 hours only to Ekaterinburg (Sverdlovsk).
And this is small distance, on your concept? Especially it exists for pre-production model which only passes tests for flight possibility?Apologies 2000km = 1200 miles!. Yes it's 2 x a small distance!  kewl1 If the machine is in service then it is there to be used.

   
  • There were two circles, the large snow circle and one of icy snow (incorrectly stated as firn) near the tent.


Who has told to you about “two circles”? There it is not formed any circle if it concerns landing or helicopter launch. Here is picture landing of more powerful helicopter - Mi-8:
The Mi-8 was a replacement for Mi-4? It can only lift a third of the payload of the mighty Mi-6? (4 tonnes versus 12 tonnes). In fact an Mi-6 could lift a Mi-8 carrying it's maximum payload!?

Show, where the circle here is formed?
This that place where helicopters in 1959 sat down. In other place helicopters there cannot sit down, because there are no conditions for this purpose.
This place is located ~ in 1000 m from tent.
Character of snow which wrongly (!) name “фирн- firn -(glacier snow)” it is well visible in the same picture.
Sharavin talks about two circles? The large one that was reported by radio and a circle of "firn" snow next to the tent. This appears to be the "hot spot" seen in photographs?

Some thoughts - All the theory needs is one Mi-6! Moscow to DP would be 4 hours flying time? If the mission made a big effort to cover up it's presence the one thing it couldn't cover up would be the blown snow at takeoff?

1.Nobody will overtake any helicopter which only has started take place trial runs on any distance from test airdrome.2.To place of events not two hours of summer, and it will turn out not less than 6 hours if competently consider flight route. For the helicopter which by that moment flew less than 6 hours, it is nonsense.Not nonsense. Your history of this machine is opposed to the history i am finding on the web.
First flight of the V-6 occurred in September of 1957 with test pilot N.B. Leshin at the controls. The V-6 ultimately graduated to become a full-production model by 1960 - https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=283#history

3.Who and what for tried hide there, it is not known for what purpose and with what intentions?Yes that is the mystery we are discussing on this website.
4.Traces from arrival and helicopter flying away there does not remain in some hours after it has departed. Under any weather conditions. There such conditions.The footsteps lasted for 3 weeks? A helicopter would be producing hot exhaust gases that could warm the snow "fixing" the circle for a considerable period. The Mi-6 used two turboshaft engines, basically two jet engines. That's a lot of heat being blown down on the snow.
 What for that that to hide it is artificial, if anything and so does not remain?I think that there is no sense further develop conspyrology theory, only for this purpose, what continue senseless conversation. I will not participate in it further.Perhaps it was ball lightning then. There's not much else that fits.
[/q]
« Last Edit: April 12, 2019, 06:23:18 AM by Nigel Evans »
 

April 12, 2019, 12:00:06 PM
Reply #7
Offline

Ehtnisba


Is that photo if the tent new?



Is it just me or the "snow" is really strange looking ,really like ice. From the photos if WAB everything looks normal,but here it doesn't look natural at all. First it looks like piled and pressed with shovels and then water applied on top - the way they prepare ski pistes .

Also could someone familiar with snow formations and types explain why there really is kind of flat icy looking circle here:





And WABs photos for comparison how different all is :




Homo homini lupus est!
 

April 12, 2019, 12:49:08 PM
Reply #8
Offline

Nigel Evans


This is the hot spot, on the right circled. The "firn" is not proper firn according to WAB but looks to me as if it is slush that has been carved by the wind before refreezing. N.B. people dispute this. But the proponents ask what turned it to slush?
« Last Edit: April 12, 2019, 01:24:20 PM by Nigel Evans »
 

April 12, 2019, 01:14:44 PM
Reply #9

Clacon

Guest
Ball Lightning??  grin1
 

April 12, 2019, 01:20:44 PM
Reply #10
Offline

Nigel Evans


Ball Lightning??  grin1
Hey, great minds think alike.... declare1
 

April 12, 2019, 02:05:09 PM
Reply #11
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
This is the hot spot, on the right circled. The "firn" is not proper firn according to WAB but looks to me as if it is slush that has been carved by the wind before refreezing. N.B. people dispute this. But the proponents ask what turned it to slush?


How can you tell that that is an hot spot  !  ? 
DB
 

April 12, 2019, 02:57:25 PM
Reply #12
Offline

Nigel Evans


This is the hot spot, on the right circled. The "firn" is not proper firn according to WAB but looks to me as if it is slush that has been carved by the wind before refreezing. N.B. people dispute this. But the proponents ask what turned it to slush?


How can you tell that that is an hot spot  !  ?



This is the argument, the shadows indicate the position of the sun.
 


See next post


 

April 12, 2019, 03:04:03 PM
Reply #13
Offline

Nigel Evans


So the theory is that this area is very "carved" = raised areas throwing shadows :-

  www d11 org


So the question is, why is it so lumpy? And one answer is that it is wind carved slush that has refrozen.


Hence it is named the "hotspot".

And then you have the question what raised it's temperature to make it slush?

 

April 12, 2019, 03:23:51 PM
Reply #14
Offline

WAB


Is that photo if the tent new?



Is it just me or the "snow" is really strange looking ,really like ice. From the photos if WAB everything looks normal,but here it doesn't look natural at all. First it looks like piled and pressed with shovels and then water applied on top - the way they prepare ski pistes .

Also could someone familiar with snow formations and types explain why there really is kind of flat icy looking circle here:





And WABs photos for comparison how different all is :





I have told to you very in detail in my theme about these features of snow.
But should notice that that the picture of tent which you have resulted (https://i.ibb.co/4VRKqGr/big.jpg ), is photoshop concerning an original picture (https://i.ibb.co/Nxqq5gf/IMG-20190412-214914.jpg ). To misjudge on it concerning character of snow.
All the rest, is features of perception of old photos and quality of pictures.

 

April 12, 2019, 03:33:41 PM
Reply #15
Offline

WAB


Teddy provided me with this link to a question and answer session on a Russian forum in 2013 - http://samlib.ru/p/piskarewa_m_l/sharavinkontakt.shtmlSharavin was a ...
Some thoughts - All the theory needs is one Mi-6! Moscow to DP would be 4 hours flying time? If the mission made a big effort to cover up it's presence the one thing it couldn't cover up would be the blown snow at takeoff?

Dear Nigel Evans!
 I already tried answer these 2 your messages, which (in my opinion) are very unsuccessfully formatted, but it did not manage be made. I two times wrote the answer, have spent for it about 3 hours of time, but they were gone, because time taken away by the forum engine has been exceeded. If you I as format your answers I can not answer you. Please try write shorter messages and not insert the text into body of old messages. It is very pity to me time which was gone.
Thanks.
 

April 12, 2019, 08:59:43 PM
Reply #16
Offline

Ehtnisba


This is the hot spot, on the right circled. The "firn" is not proper firn according to WAB but looks to me as if it is slush that has been carved by the wind before refreezing. N.B. people dispute this. But the proponents ask what turned it to slush?
It looks like frozen slush to me too. But I see a circle where I have put the red line.
If I look only in that "circle" I would say that this is a frozen sea with waves or glacier snow ,but we know there is no glacier there and no temperatures above zero to cause a slush. And that slush looks frozen on top of the tent like the tent has been submerged in that watery substance ...



Homo homini lupus est!
 

April 12, 2019, 09:00:48 PM
Reply #17
Offline

Ehtnisba


Nigel, you said you also believe in military cover up, but if it was a ball lightening why would the authorities try to cover it?
Homo homini lupus est!
 

April 13, 2019, 02:07:45 AM
Reply #18
Offline

Nigel Evans



Teddy provided me with this link to a question and answer session on a Russian forum in 2013 - http://samlib.ru/p/piskarewa_m_l/sharavinkontakt.shtmlSharavin was a ...
Some thoughts - All the theory needs is one Mi-6! Moscow to DP would be 4 hours flying time? If the mission made a big effort to cover up it's presence the one thing it couldn't cover up would be the blown snow at takeoff?

Dear Nigel Evans!
 I already tried answer these 2 your messages, which (in my opinion) are very unsuccessfully formatted, but it did not manage be made. I two times wrote the answer, have spent for it about 3 hours of time, but they were gone, because time taken away by the forum engine has been exceeded. If you I as format your answers I can not answer you. Please try write shorter messages and not insert the text into body of old messages. It is very pity to me time which was gone.
Thanks.
Hi, very sorry to hear that you wasted three hours, not good. But it's quite unnecessary? You can login with an indefinite session that wont time out?
« Last Edit: April 13, 2019, 02:12:56 AM by Nigel Evans »
 

April 13, 2019, 02:12:08 AM
Reply #19
Offline

Nigel Evans


This is the hot spot, on the right circled. The "firn" is not proper firn according to WAB but looks to me as if it is slush that has been carved by the wind before refreezing. N.B. people dispute this. But the proponents ask what turned it to slush?
It looks like frozen slush to me too. But I see a circle where I have put the red line.
If I look only in that "circle" I would say that this is a frozen sea with waves or glacier snow ,but we know there is no glacier there and no temperatures above zero to cause a slush. And that slush looks frozen on top of the tent like the tent has been submerged in that watery substance ...



Yes it looks like it's refrozen slush to me. Got a feeling WAB has a different explanation  kewl1 The snow on the tent was very hard apparently. In his interview Koptelov says that the rescue team discussed warming as an explanation for the evidence including persistent footsteps.


 

April 13, 2019, 02:51:21 AM
Reply #20
Offline

Nigel Evans


Nigel, you said you also believe in military cover up, but if it was a ball lightening why would the authorities try to cover it?
No i believe that the evidence can be explained by ball lightning or military action or probably more likely a combination. Semyon's photos particularly Plane1/Plane2 are key

Is this a photo of a self illuminating object hovering above the peak or just water damage? Is it a missile? Well if the latter where is the light coming from?




Is that a cloud of snow underneath? Is that corner part of the hill?
 
If the former then as well as emitting radiation in the visible region it could be emitting in the microwave (radar) region and then you have a narrative for a missile attack and an urgent need to transport reconnaissance vehicle(s) to the location. Then you have a good explanation for spending three months triple probing 1500 hectares of mountain for proof of wreckage under the guise of searching for bodies (which was also desirable but possibly not the main purpose). If you read the case files they initially used metal detectors to "search for the bodies". When the metal detection failed to "find any bodies" they switched to avalanche probing which would also detect plastics, fibreglass etc as well as bodies.
So a good narrative is that they misunderstood natural electro magnetic radiation as an ingress into their airspace by an unknown craft and then spent a lot of effort trying to find pieces of it after attacking it with missiles. The DPI group just being unlucky to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and accidentally killed. It's possible that the military were unaware of the groups demise before discovery by civilian groups. Then they have little room for maneuver so just they have to summon the police investigator to Moscow and order him to front an accidental death coverup (or else).


 

April 13, 2019, 05:07:28 AM
Reply #21
Offline

Ehtnisba


Your theory seem to explain evidences but there are so many coincidences in it that it is highly unprobable. Universe don't work this way,like in a movie ...too many thing have to coincide and lets be honest ,it never happens like this. Real life is pretty chaotic .
Homo homini lupus est!
 

April 13, 2019, 05:51:43 AM
Reply #22
Offline

Nigel Evans


Your theory seem to explain evidences but there are so many coincidences in it that it is highly unprobable. Universe don't work this way,like in a movie ...too many thing have to coincide and lets be honest ,it never happens like this. Real life is pretty chaotic .
Whatever happened, it starts with improbable and gets less likely...  kewl1
I think i'm getting close, look at this - https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-36-39
"27.02. All groups from the remaining areas were transferred on the pass between the Peaks 880 1079, and a base camp for searches parties was set up below the forest boundary.In total the camp consisted of:
Slobtsov group- 5 people
Karelib group- 5 people
Akselrod group- 5 people
Captain Chernyshov group- 5 people
Mansi Stepan Kurikov group- 4 people
group of operatives with specially trained dogs
leaded by Sr Lt Moyseev- 2 people
radio operator of the North-Ural expedition G. Nevolin
Later arrived:
 group of Master of Sports from Moscow Bardin, Baskin and Shuleshko and with them Korolev (Sverdlovsk).
 group of cadets of the sergeant school of Ivdellag under the orders of the Sr Lt Potapov - 10 people.
group of sappers with mine detectors under the orders of Lieutenant Colonel Shestopalov - 7 people.
 Ahead of all of the groups was the master of sports E. N. Maslennikov, captain A. Chernyshev became the deputy.
 All the rescuers involved, taking into account the transfer of people between the Ivdel camps - about 30-35 people.
Initially, the search was conducted in the most probable direction of finding the missing hikers."

So most of the group are civilians, cadets, master of sports AND! a group of 7 sappers with mine detectors independently under the orders of a Lieutenant Colonel, to look for dead people?

Ho hum.


 

April 13, 2019, 06:37:52 AM
Reply #23
Offline

Ehtnisba


Military - yes.
I was saying all the coincidences with ball lightening, tanks on top of hikers, etc... Just the scenario seems unprobable.. Same as aliens waking up an yeti. They both may exist ,but both meeting each other is too much...
Ball lightening is a rare phenomenon , tank passing through your body in a vast wilderness is even more rare. Both of them happening is too much too :)
Homo homini lupus est!
 

April 13, 2019, 06:49:28 AM
Reply #24
Offline

Nigel Evans


Military - yes.
I was saying all the coincidences with ball lightening, tanks on top of hikers, etc... Just the scenario seems unprobable.. Same as aliens waking up an yeti. They both may exist ,but both meeting each other is too much...
Ball lightening is a rare phenomenon ,
Semyon's photos...

tank passing through your body in a vast wilderness is even more rare. Both of them happening is too much too :)That's probably why they built the den in the ravine...



 

April 13, 2019, 07:16:56 AM
Reply #25
Offline

Ehtnisba


Semion's three heads, are not from his camera and I don't know who decided to put it there. This is an enlarged area of Krivonishenko's notorious last frame





« Last Edit: April 13, 2019, 02:14:24 PM by Ehtnisba »
Homo homini lupus est!
 

April 13, 2019, 01:49:27 PM
Reply #26
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
So the theory is that this area is very "carved" = raised areas throwing shadows :-

  www d11 org


So the question is, why is it so lumpy? And one answer is that it is wind carved slush that has refrozen.


Hence it is named the "hotspot".

And then you have the question what raised it's temperature to make it slush?

No I dont go with that. It doesnt look anything out of the ordinary to me.
DB
 

April 13, 2019, 01:51:43 PM
Reply #27
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Nigel, you said you also believe in military cover up, but if it was a ball lightening why would the authorities try to cover it?
No i believe that the evidence can be explained by ball lightning or military action or probably more likely a combination. Semyon's photos particularly Plane1/Plane2 are key

Is this a photo of a self illuminating object hovering above the peak or just water damage? Is it a missile? Well if the latter where is the light coming from?




Is that a cloud of snow underneath? Is that corner part of the hill?
 
If the former then as well as emitting radiation in the visible region it could be emitting in the microwave (radar) region and then you have a narrative for a missile attack and an urgent need to transport reconnaissance vehicle(s) to the location. Then you have a good explanation for spending three months triple probing 1500 hectares of mountain for proof of wreckage under the guise of searching for bodies (which was also desirable but possibly not the main purpose). If you read the case files they initially used metal detectors to "search for the bodies". When the metal detection failed to "find any bodies" they switched to avalanche probing which would also detect plastics, fibreglass etc as well as bodies.
So a good narrative is that they misunderstood natural electro magnetic radiation as an ingress into their airspace by an unknown craft and then spent a lot of effort trying to find pieces of it after attacking it with missiles. The DPI group just being unlucky to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and accidentally killed. It's possible that the military were unaware of the groups demise before discovery by civilian groups. Then they have little room for maneuver so just they have to summon the police investigator to Moscow and order him to front an accidental death coverup (or else).

Its FILM DAMAGE or contamination.
DB
 

April 13, 2019, 01:55:13 PM
Reply #28
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Your theory seem to explain evidences but there are so many coincidences in it that it is highly unprobable. Universe don't work this way,like in a movie ...too many thing have to coincide and lets be honest ,it never happens like this. Real life is pretty chaotic .
Whatever happened, it starts with improbable and gets less likely...  kewl1
I think i'm getting close, look at this - https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-36-39
"27.02. All groups from the remaining areas were transferred on the pass between the Peaks 880 1079, and a base camp for searches parties was set up below the forest boundary.In total the camp consisted of:
Slobtsov group- 5 people
Karelib group- 5 people
Akselrod group- 5 people
Captain Chernyshov group- 5 people
Mansi Stepan Kurikov group- 4 people
group of operatives with specially trained dogs
leaded by Sr Lt Moyseev- 2 people
radio operator of the North-Ural expedition G. Nevolin
Later arrived:
 group of Master of Sports from Moscow Bardin, Baskin and Shuleshko and with them Korolev (Sverdlovsk).
 group of cadets of the sergeant school of Ivdellag under the orders of the Sr Lt Potapov - 10 people.
group of sappers with mine detectors under the orders of Lieutenant Colonel Shestopalov - 7 people.
 Ahead of all of the groups was the master of sports E. N. Maslennikov, captain A. Chernyshev became the deputy.
 All the rescuers involved, taking into account the transfer of people between the Ivdel camps - about 30-35 people.
Initially, the search was conducted in the most probable direction of finding the missing hikers."

So most of the group are civilians, cadets, master of sports AND! a group of 7 sappers with mine detectors independently under the orders of a Lieutenant Colonel, to look for dead people?

Ho hum.


So what exactly are you getting close to  !  ?  I see nothing out of the ordinary in those various search parties.  In fact its what one could maybe expect from something that was a genuine search effort and not pre planned.  But after the finding of the final bodies things then did change quickly.
DB
 

April 13, 2019, 02:47:52 PM
Reply #29
Offline

Nigel Evans


[
So what exactly are you getting close to  !  ?  I see nothing out of the ordinary in those various search parties.  In fact its what one could maybe expect from something that was a genuine search effort and not pre planned.  But after the finding of the final bodies things then did change quickly.
The rank is too senior - Lieutenant Colonel to instruct a unit of 7 sappers in assisting a search for hikers led by civilians? Why not just a Captain? Why have a Colonel personally pulling three month old corpses out of the ground. These ranks are far too senior for such tasks. Unless there are secrets to be kept, to only be trusted to senior officers perhaps.

Sweeping the area with mine (metal) detectors hints at hunting for debris.