November 23, 2024, 04:53:08 AM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: Is this a record of Yuri K limping?  (Read 40054 times)

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

February 27, 2020, 11:41:50 PM
Reply #30
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Here's a video of a Proton M launch "going wrong". The ProtonM began in 1965 so not directly relevant to the DPI but there are a couple of relevant points.
  • What seems to happen here is that the hydrazine supply is faulty, but note the unspent nitric acid (orange smoke).
  • As it goes faster it is structurally weak wrt lateral forces from sideways atmospheric drag and the top section breaks away. note the similarity to the plane 2 photo.

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/781937554034589386/

Just for entertainment here's another vid of some Mig29s playing, ah. Getting a bit close to the ground there guys...
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/652036852282561846/

You will notice too that the nitric acid vaporises and disperses as it exhausts under pressure and the whole thing becomes a fire ball when it breaks up.

Regards

Star man
Disperse does not mean go away.

But it would more likely be a finely divided and diluted aerosol.

To get sprayed with fuel the rocket would need to crash nearby the tent spraying fuel everywhere and we see no burning of the tent.

Regards
Star man
 

February 28, 2020, 02:34:02 AM
Reply #31
Offline

WAB


Here's a video of a Proton M launch "going wrong". The ProtonM began in 1965 so not directly relevant to the DPI but there are a couple of relevant points.
  • What seems to happen here is that the hydrazine supply is faulty, but note the unspent nitric acid (orange smoke).
  • As it goes faster it is structurally weak wrt lateral forces from sideways atmospheric drag and the top section breaks away. note the similarity to the plane 2 photo.

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/781937554034589386/

Just for entertainment here's another vid of some Mig29s playing, ah. Getting a bit close to the ground there guys...
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/652036852282561846/

You will notice too that the nitric acid vaporises and disperses as it exhausts under pressure and the whole thing becomes a fire ball when it breaks up.

Regards

Star man
Disperse does not mean go away.

But it would more likely be a finely divided and diluted aerosol.

To get sprayed with fuel the rocket would need to crash nearby the tent spraying fuel everywhere and we see no burning of the tent.

Regards
Star man


Hi, Star man.
If you don't mind, I'll insert my 2 cents, or , .
or
  ? :)
1.   Thank you, Nigel Evans, for illustrating the Proton accident! Here are two things that may be important to discuss:...
A) orange color - accident of one (of six!) engine - complete or partial failure of the pump supply of the fuel itself (UDMH; 1,1-dimethylhydrazine or Heptyl - H2NN(CH3)2), which means the supply of only one oxidizer, which is nitrogen tetraoxide or N2O4.
B) this results in an asymmetrical rocket twist and an accident in the launch phase. This is about 2 ... 10 km (1.5 ... 6 mi) from the launch complex.
C) I want to pay attention to how the missile breaks down at the end of the flight: First, the head unit with the upper block at the junction with the first and second stages is separated, and then the stages # 1 & 2 themselves break down.
This is a consequence of the high level of Coriollis acceleration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_force) and on the basis of the Nikolai Zhukovsky Rule (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolay_Zhukovsky_(scientist) ).  (who for some reason is my distant relative... :) ).
I wrote about this destruction a long time ago, when I said that a rocket cannot bend at a large angle without damaging its structure. It was in contrast to the claims that ... "the rocket accidentally deviated from its course and flew to the Dyatlov Pass ...". That can't be because the missile's trajectories were calculated in other directions.
Therefore, one may not consider the missile accident as the cause of the events at the Dyatlov Pass because there are no signs of it. Besides, there is no evidence that there was a launch that could have led to a hit there. R-7 missiles that could have flown at the available real range were launched in a completely different direction (from Kazakhstan to Kamchatka), while there were no other missiles that had the right range at the time.
PS. I don't understand at all: what does talking about missiles have to do with "Is this a record of Yuri K limping”?
 

February 28, 2020, 02:36:36 AM
Reply #32
Offline

Nigel Evans


Here's a video of a Proton M launch "going wrong". The ProtonM began in 1965 so not directly relevant to the DPI but there are a couple of relevant points.
  • What seems to happen here is that the hydrazine supply is faulty, but note the unspent nitric acid (orange smoke).
  • As it goes faster it is structurally weak wrt lateral forces from sideways atmospheric drag and the top section breaks away. note the similarity to the plane 2 photo.

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/781937554034589386/

Just for entertainment here's another vid of some Mig29s playing, ah. Getting a bit close to the ground there guys...
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/652036852282561846/

You will notice too that the nitric acid vaporises and disperses as it exhausts under pressure and the whole thing becomes a fire ball when it breaks up.

Regards

Star man
Disperse does not mean go away.

But it would more likely be a finely divided and diluted aerosol.

To get sprayed with fuel the rocket would need to crash nearby the tent spraying fuel everywhere and we see no burning of the tent.

Regards
Star man
Burning only takes place where both components land by random chance. The strong wind would create a long contamination zone, the young firs at the tree line were wiithin it. There are reports of orange snow.
 

February 28, 2020, 03:16:22 AM
Reply #33
Offline

Nigel Evans


Here's a video of a Proton M launch "going wrong". The ProtonM began in 1965 so not directly relevant to the DPI but there are a couple of relevant points.
  • What seems to happen here is that the hydrazine supply is faulty, but note the unspent nitric acid (orange smoke).
  • As it goes faster it is structurally weak wrt lateral forces from sideways atmospheric drag and the top section breaks away. note the similarity to the plane 2 photo.

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/781937554034589386/

Just for entertainment here's another vid of some Mig29s playing, ah. Getting a bit close to the ground there guys...
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/652036852282561846/

You will notice too that the nitric acid vaporises and disperses as it exhausts under pressure and the whole thing becomes a fire ball when it breaks up.

Regards

Star man
Disperse does not mean go away.

But it would more likely be a finely divided and diluted aerosol.

To get sprayed with fuel the rocket would need to crash nearby the tent spraying fuel everywhere and we see no burning of the tent.

Regards
Star man


Hi, Star man.
If you don't mind, I'll insert my 2 cents, or , .
or
  ? :)
1.   Thank you, Nigel Evans, for illustrating the Proton accident! Here are two things that may be important to discuss:...
A) orange color - accident of one (of six!) engine - complete or partial failure of the pump supply of the fuel itself (UDMH; 1,1-dimethylhydrazine or Heptyl - H2NN(CH3)2), which means the supply of only one oxidizer, which is nitrogen tetraoxide or N2O4.
B) this results in an asymmetrical rocket twist and an accident in the launch phase. This is about 2 ... 10 km (1.5 ... 6 mi) from the launch complex.
C) I want to pay attention to how the missile breaks down at the end of the flight: First, the head unit with the upper block at the junction with the first and second stages is separated, and then the stages # 1 & 2 themselves break down.
This is a consequence of the high level of Coriollis acceleration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_force) and on the basis of the Nikolai Zhukovsky Rule (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolay_Zhukovsky_(scientist) ).  (who for some reason is my distant relative... :) ).
I wrote about this destruction a long time ago, when I said that a rocket cannot bend at a large angle without damaging its structure. It was in contrast to the claims that ... "the rocket accidentally deviated from its course and flew to the Dyatlov Pass ...". That can't be because the missile's trajectories were calculated in other directions.
Therefore, one may not consider the missile accident as the cause of the events at the Dyatlov Pass because there are no signs of it. Besides, there is no evidence that there was a launch that could have led to a hit there. R-7 missiles that could have flown at the available real range were launched in a completely different direction (from Kazakhstan to Kamchatka), while there were no other missiles that had the right range at the time.
PS. I don't understand at all: what does talking about missiles have to do with "Is this a record of Yuri K limping”?

I'll raise the stakes....

 



Hi WAB.
Ok coriolis and aerodynamic forces perhaps.  kewl1
PS. I don't understand at all: what does talking about missiles have to do with "Is this a record of Yuri K limping”?It's about reverse engineering the problem, starting at the end result and asking what could cause this?
The various injuries and apparent sickness are an extremely good fit for hydrazine - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrazine - "Hydrazine exposure can cause skin irritation/contact dermatitis and burning, irritation to the eyes/nose/throat, nausea/vomiting, shortness of breath, pulmonary edema, headache, dizziness, central nervous system depression, lethargy, temporary blindness, seizures and coma.".
 
In particular -  Zinaida was found with her face covered in blood and the morgue photos show the sores that caused that. How else could she have got these other than from some chemical agent? Toboganning head first using her face as brake? Igor had vomited and was bleeding from his ears and mouth? YuriD's pulmonary edema is a fit although hypothermia is another of course.


And then we come on to YuriK's burns and in particular his charred toe. How is it possible to carbonise just one side of just one toe?

Then there's the burnt firs at the treeline. Ivanov chose directed heat rays, i now prefer the rocket fuel theory. Curiously if both propellant components met in the air they would ignite into a fire orb....

Then there's strange marks on the bodies, photos of YuriK and Igor both showing curved lines that terminate in a perpendicular stripe. Caused by metal fragments of a repeating pattern?
« Last Edit: February 28, 2020, 08:38:22 AM by Nigel Evans »
 

February 28, 2020, 05:07:37 AM
Reply #34
Offline

Nigel Evans


Further points to WAB :-
  • there were reports of orange snow? note that watermelon snow algae is red and the associated snow appears pink.
  • YuriD's jumper was disintegrating and covered in orange powder?
  • Semyon's plane2 photo is so named because it looks like an aerodynamic structure?
  • Lyudmila's yellow brown face / white chin suggests chemical exposure? Unlikely to be sunburn....
  • the tent has many tears on one side and only one on the other side suggesting an asymmetry of degradation?
  • after the discovery of the tent one of the first actions of the military is to sweep the area with metal detectors commanded by a senior staff officer (Lt Colonel)?
 

February 28, 2020, 08:49:58 AM
Reply #35
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Here's a video of a Proton M launch "going wrong". The ProtonM began in 1965 so not directly relevant to the DPI but there are a couple of relevant points.
  • What seems to happen here is that the hydrazine supply is faulty, but note the unspent nitric acid (orange smoke).
  • As it goes faster it is structurally weak wrt lateral forces from sideways atmospheric drag and the top section breaks away. note the similarity to the plane 2 photo.

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/781937554034589386/

Just for entertainment here's another vid of some Mig29s playing, ah. Getting a bit close to the ground there guys...
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/652036852282561846/

You will notice too that the nitric acid vaporises and disperses as it exhausts under pressure and the whole thing becomes a fire ball when it breaks up.

Regards

Star man
Disperse does not mean go away.

But it would more likely be a finely divided and diluted aerosol.

To get sprayed with fuel the rocket would need to crash nearby the tent spraying fuel everywhere and we see no burning of the tent.

Regards
Star man


Hi, Star man.
If you don't mind, I'll insert my 2 cents, or , .
or
  ? :)
1.   Thank you, Nigel Evans, for illustrating the Proton accident! Here are two things that may be important to discuss:...
A) orange color - accident of one (of six!) engine - complete or partial failure of the pump supply of the fuel itself (UDMH; 1,1-dimethylhydrazine or Heptyl - H2NN(CH3)2), which means the supply of only one oxidizer, which is nitrogen tetraoxide or N2O4.
B) this results in an asymmetrical rocket twist and an accident in the launch phase. This is about 2 ... 10 km (1.5 ... 6 mi) from the launch complex.
C) I want to pay attention to how the missile breaks down at the end of the flight: First, the head unit with the upper block at the junction with the first and second stages is separated, and then the stages # 1 & 2 themselves break down.
This is a consequence of the high level of Coriollis acceleration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_force) and on the basis of the Nikolai Zhukovsky Rule (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolay_Zhukovsky_(scientist) ).  (who for some reason is my distant relative... :) ).
I wrote about this destruction a long time ago, when I said that a rocket cannot bend at a large angle without damaging its structure. It was in contrast to the claims that ... "the rocket accidentally deviated from its course and flew to the Dyatlov Pass ...". That can't be because the missile's trajectories were calculated in other directions.
Therefore, one may not consider the missile accident as the cause of the events at the Dyatlov Pass because there are no signs of it. Besides, there is no evidence that there was a launch that could have led to a hit there. R-7 missiles that could have flown at the available real range were launched in a completely different direction (from Kazakhstan to Kamchatka), while there were no other missiles that had the right range at the time.
PS. I don't understand at all: what does talking about missiles have to do with "Is this a record of Yuri K limping”?

2 cents accepted.  Makes sense to me.

Regards
Star man
 

February 28, 2020, 03:38:42 PM
Reply #36
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Further points to WAB :-
  • there were reports of orange snow? note that watermelon snow algae is red and the associated snow appears pink.
  • YuriD's jumper was disintegrating and covered in orange powder?
  • Semyon's plane2 photo is so named because it looks like an aerodynamic structure?
  • Lyudmila's yellow brown face / white chin suggests chemical exposure? Unlikely to be sunburn....
  • the tent has many tears on one side and only one on the other side suggesting an asymmetry of degradation?
  • after the discovery of the tent one of the first actions of the military is to sweep the area with metal detectors commanded by a senior staff officer (Lt Colonel)?

I think the key thing for me is  - what actuall happened at the tent?  The forensics suggest that at least 3 cuts were made from the inside.  I have looked at those cuts closely from the photographs and it appears that subsequent tears in the fabric intercept the cuts in a way that may indicate that once the initial cuts were made, someone pulled at the holes to make them bigger, tearing the fabric.  As you say Nigel, the cuts/tears seem to be mainly on the one side.  Is that significant? Not sure, but why would they do that?   It seems like they couldn't get out of the tent fast enough.  Did they panic?  Does the proposed hole in the tent on the opposite side have anything to do with it? 

Regards

Star man
 

February 28, 2020, 04:56:16 PM
Reply #37
Offline

Nigel Evans


Further points to WAB :-
  • there were reports of orange snow? note that watermelon snow algae is red and the associated snow appears pink.
  • YuriD's jumper was disintegrating and covered in orange powder?
  • Semyon's plane2 photo is so named because it looks like an aerodynamic structure?
  • Lyudmila's yellow brown face / white chin suggests chemical exposure? Unlikely to be sunburn....
  • the tent has many tears on one side and only one on the other side suggesting an asymmetry of degradation?
  • after the discovery of the tent one of the first actions of the military is to sweep the area with metal detectors commanded by a senior staff officer (Lt Colonel)?

I think the key thing for me is  - what actuall happened at the tent?  The forensics suggest that at least 3 cuts were made from the inside.  I have looked at those cuts closely from the photographs and it appears that subsequent tears in the fabric intercept the cuts in a way that may indicate that once the initial cuts were made, someone pulled at the holes to make them bigger, tearing the fabric.  As you say Nigel, the cuts/tears seem to be mainly on the one side.  Is that significant? Not sure, but why would they do that?   It seems like they couldn't get out of the tent fast enough.  Did they panic?  Does the proposed hole in the tent on the opposite side have anything to do with it? 

Regards

Star man
For me the key thing is finding THE narrative, the one that explains ALL the evidence. Not just some of it. There's 75 plus narratives that can do that.

Hence the missile theory, the problem with the ball lightning theory is that it's very good at explaining say 98% albeit with a somewhat low probability but not 100%. But the missile theory can explain everything. The big problem with it is that it requires an explanation for the lack of debris which makes certain members here scoff.  afraid7
But hovering helicopters leave snow rings....

Regards Nigel  kewl1
 

February 28, 2020, 07:06:42 PM
Reply #38
Offline

WAB


Here's a video of a Proton M launch "going wrong". The ProtonM began in 1965 so not directly relevant to the DPI but there are a couple of relevant points.
  • What seems to happen here is that the hydrazine supply is faulty, but note the unspent nitric acid (orange smoke).
  • As it goes faster it is structurally weak wrt lateral forces from sideways atmospheric drag and the top section breaks away. note the similarity to the plane 2 photo.

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/781937554034589386/

Just for entertainment here's another vid of some Mig29s playing, ah. Getting a bit close to the ground there guys...
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/652036852282561846/

You will notice too that the nitric acid vaporises and disperses as it exhausts under pressure and the whole thing becomes a fire ball when it breaks up.

Regards

Star man
Disperse does not mean go away.

But it would more likely be a finely divided and diluted aerosol.

To get sprayed with fuel the rocket would need to crash nearby the tent spraying fuel everywhere and we see no burning of the tent.

Regards
Star man


Hi, Star man.
If you don't mind, I'll insert my 2 cents, or , .
or
  ? :)
1.   Thank you, Nigel Evans, for illustrating the Proton accident! Here are two things that may be important to discuss:...
A) orange color - accident of one (of six!) engine - complete or partial failure of the pump supply of the fuel itself (UDMH; 1,1-dimethylhydrazine or Heptyl - H2NN(CH3)2), which means the supply of only one oxidizer, which is nitrogen tetraoxide or N2O4.
B) this results in an asymmetrical rocket twist and an accident in the launch phase. This is about 2 ... 10 km (1.5 ... 6 mi) from the launch complex.
C) I want to pay attention to how the missile breaks down at the end of the flight: First, the head unit with the upper block at the junction with the first and second stages is separated, and then the stages # 1 & 2 themselves break down.
This is a consequence of the high level of Coriollis acceleration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_force) and on the basis of the Nikolai Zhukovsky Rule (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolay_Zhukovsky_(scientist) ).  (who for some reason is my distant relative... :) ).
I wrote about this destruction a long time ago, when I said that a rocket cannot bend at a large angle without damaging its structure. It was in contrast to the claims that ... "the rocket accidentally deviated from its course and flew to the Dyatlov Pass ...". That can't be because the missile's trajectories were calculated in other directions.
Therefore, one may not consider the missile accident as the cause of the events at the Dyatlov Pass because there are no signs of it. Besides, there is no evidence that there was a launch that could have led to a hit there. R-7 missiles that could have flown at the available real range were launched in a completely different direction (from Kazakhstan to Kamchatka), while there were no other missiles that had the right range at the time.
PS. I don't understand at all: what does talking about missiles have to do with "Is this a record of Yuri K limping”?

I'll raise the stakes....

(Just keep in mind "we, here in Russia, people are poor - according to your media information" - we do not have such money :). We have everything measured in kilograms! That's £2.5 :) ).


 

That's the kind of money I was talking about.

Hi WAB.
Ok coriolis and aerodynamic forces perhaps.  kewl1

It's not only possible, it's even more than a fact - it was fully...

PS. I don't understand at all: what does talking about missiles have to do with "Is this a record of Yuri K limping”?It's about reverse engineering the problem, starting at the end result and asking what could cause this?

It's okay. Unless there are empty conversations without taking into account the real facts... I mean, the complete absence of these "reverse engineering problems" and the works associated with them. Conversations – it were, and facts exist = 0.

The various injuries and apparent sickness are an extremely good fit for hydrazine - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrazine - "Hydrazine exposure can cause skin irritation/contact dermatitis and burning, irritation to the eyes/nose/throat, nausea/vomiting, shortness of breath, pulmonary edema, headache, dizziness, central nervous system depression, lethargy, temporary blindness, seizures and coma.".

That's good, but why talk about something that wasn't available at the time. Rockets with Heptyl fuel and nitrogen-containing oxidizing agents started to be used only 1.5 years later. And the time machine wasn't invented until now. :)

 
In particular -  Zinaida was found with her face covered in blood and the morgue photos show the sores that caused that. How else could she have got these other than from some chemical agent?

Ooh! Dear Nigel Evans, why are you changing concepts? She had a moderate amount of blood near her face. That's easy to get if you stumble on how many surfaces at night. The conditions there were more than anything.
By the way, there are no signs of chemical exposure in the photos and the doctor did not mark even the smallest signs in the protocol.

Toboganning head first using her face as brake? Igor had vomited and was bleeding from his ears and mouth?

It could have been very easy there. I can only explain it very clearly to you standing on that very slope in winter. I won't even have to tell you anything. You'll see everything very clearly for yourself.

YuriD's pulmonary edema is a fit although hypothermia is another of course.

Why are you saying things that aren't on the court physician's report? It's either inaccurate translations or just fantasies on a loose subject. Yuri Doroshenko's gray substance is only the result of the melted snow in his mouth when he was lying in the forest, when it was transported to Ivdel city, and when this snow melted. This is often the case with bodies that were found under the snow. Like those who were caught in an avalanche. I've seen it several times in other similar searches. There's no need for any pulmonary edema. Although with the frost that was during the events and the intense work it could be exact. But there's no such indication in the report. There's no need to speculate for a doctor, you can't see it in front of you.

And then we come on to YuriK's burns and in particular his charred toe. How is it possible to carbonise just one side of just one toe?

Have you ever lost the sensitivity of your fingers, like your hands, for a long time in a severe frost? Especially if it was a borderline condition near frostbite? I've seen it many times during my winter journeys and I've never seen it myself. My hands can't feel anything (my legs can't feel either). I saw a lady taking a bucket by the arc, which was heated up very strongly, but I didn't feel a strong burn while carrying this bucket 2...3 meters (that's about 10 feet), while traveling on the Kola Peninsula in the next group. Only then did she feel the burn. It was already a third-degree burn. There were blisters and a slight necrosis of the surface tissue. But she was in a normal state of mind, she didn't have a cloudy state of consciousness, which Georgy Krivonishchenko must have had. They worked very hard in the cold and were tired. Additionally, they could turn off the consciousness when they lit the fire and got the first signs of heat. It's very relaxing. In science it's called thermal relaxation.


Then there's the burnt firs at the treeline. Ivanov chose directed heat rays, i now prefer the rocket fuel theory. Curiously if both propellant components met in the air they would ignite into a fire orb....

Except Ivanov (and it was he who spoke 35 years after the events), no one knows about it and has not seen anything like it, although they have been on the spot for much longer than Ivanov himself.
It is not serious to talk about fuel and fireballs, if the very fact of the rocket is absent at all. On rumors and gossip can build any number of erroneous versions, only who would need it? The most important thing - why do you need it?
The "fireballs" themselves have already been clearly identified by the search participants as a result of launching missiles at a very long distance - several thousand kilometers or miles. There are no events that coincide in time with the accuracy of minutes, which should be explained more fabulous than it actually is.

Then there's strange marks on the bodies, photos of YuriK and Igor both showing curved lines that terminate in a perpendicular stripe. Caused by metal fragments of a repeating pattern?

I didn't get it. Tell me more about what you wanted to say with this?
 

February 28, 2020, 07:15:01 PM
Reply #39
Offline

WAB


Further points to WAB :-
  • there were reports of orange snow? note that watermelon snow algae is red and the associated snow appears pink.

If you are talking about reddish Chlamydomonas nivalis seeds, whose cells are thickly filled with red pigment? We have seen such reddish fields many times not only on the pass, but in many other places as well.  They appear only on hard snow (nast) and increase in colour closer to spring. What does it have to do with the death of Dyatlov's group?

   
  • YuriD's jumper was disintegrating and covered in orange powder?

Where'd you get that from? There was even talk of some kind of purple shade, but there was nothing else but talk.
By the way, do you know where those conversations came from?
Another question: Did you ever see the color of a fresh corpse that had just been dug out of the snow?
If you haven't, here's a photo:



It is that from rocket fuel, too? :)

   
  • Semyon's plane2 photo is so named because it looks like an aerodynamic structure?

1. This photo is not of Semen, but of different Valentin Yakimenko's considerations, which have nothing to do with any picture.
2. This is a strong increase in the hyposulfite crystal on the film, because it was not washed well. Since the storage of such films for several decades, these crystals sometimes appear. The size of such a crystal is a few tenths of a millimeter, or hundredths of an inch. Next to the perforation window of the film, they seem gigantic. Like this:





It is that the famous "Plane"?
These are common defects on the film when it is stored for a long time. This is quite clear to anyone who has taken film photography before digital photography appeared.
 


The width of the film perforation window is 0.11 in. A crystal called "Airplane" is about 20 times that size.

   
  • Lyudmila's yellow brown face / white chin suggests chemical exposure? Unlikely to be sunburn....

This is not an argument at all. In a medical study in May, she didn't have half of her facial tissue at all. What color is there to talk about?

   
  • the tent has many tears on one side and only one on the other side suggesting an asymmetry of degradation?

It shows that the wind carried the sparks from the furnace exhaust into that line. And nothing else. Hitting the tent with rocket fuel burns it completely.

   
  • after the discovery of the tent one of the first actions of the military is to sweep the area with metal detectors commanded by a senior staff officer (Lt Colonel)?

That was far from the first action. Soldiers of the railway troops arrived at the place together with the second or even third shift of the search participants. This is a traditional military mistake: to bring mine detectors and search under deep snow for people who have almost no metal objects. This was the case in my practice several times when the military was given the command to participate in the search. Never once did they find anything, but they have always acted with mine detectors. By the way, the lieutenant colonel himself did not come to the pass, he was in Ivdel city, where the headquarters of the battalion of railway troops was located. They were building a railroad from Ivdel to the Ob River. Soldiers of the railway troops were on the pass for a short time. There was a man with the same first name on the pass - Shestopalov - in the third group of search participants. He was a student at the UPI University.
You can't build theories based on rumors and conversations only. That's the way to a dead end.
 

February 28, 2020, 07:19:20 PM
Reply #40
Offline

WAB


.........................................
For me the key thing is finding THE narrative, the one that explains ALL the evidence. Not just some of it. There's 75 plus narratives that can do that. [/quote]

The number of theories is not an approximation to the truth. Rather, it is the opposite. This is the case when a lot of garbage is thrown on a small number of necessary objects.
So that's a very controversial statement.

Hence the missile theory, the problem with the ball lightning theory is that it's very good at explaining say 98% albeit with a somewhat low probability but not 100%. But the missile theory can explain everything. The big problem with it is that it requires an explanation for the lack of debris which makes certain members here scoff.  afraid7

If you know well about rockets or ball lightning, it doesn't explain anything, because it immediately leads to contradictions when something is said that wasn't there at all, or at the time the conversation is going on.
As for the missile debris on the ground, that is the best proof that there were no missiles. Even in the XVIII century proved a simple natural wisdom: nothing disappears into nowhere, and nothing of anything appears. Mysticism is only a form of imagination in individuals, but has no proof in nature.

But hovering helicopters leave snow rings....

If you know the aerodynamics of helicopters well, you wouldn't make such claims. Helicopters has never left such rings. It's a myth invented by those who only know about helicopters that he's seen them from afar.
 

February 29, 2020, 02:12:24 AM
Reply #41
Offline

Nigel Evans


Here's a video of a Proton M launch "going wrong". The ProtonM began in 1965 so not directly relevant to the DPI but there are a couple of relevant points.
  • What seems to happen here is that the hydrazine supply is faulty, but note the unspent nitric acid (orange smoke).
  • As it goes faster it is structurally weak wrt lateral forces from sideways atmospheric drag and the top section breaks away. note the similarity to the plane 2 photo.

https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/781937554034589386/

Just for entertainment here's another vid of some Mig29s playing, ah. Getting a bit close to the ground there guys...
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/652036852282561846/

You will notice too that the nitric acid vaporises and disperses as it exhausts under pressure and the whole thing becomes a fire ball when it breaks up.

Regards

Star man
Disperse does not mean go away.

But it would more likely be a finely divided and diluted aerosol.

To get sprayed with fuel the rocket would need to crash nearby the tent spraying fuel everywhere and we see no burning of the tent.

Regards
Star man


Hi, Star man.
If you don't mind, I'll insert my 2 cents, or , .
or
  ? :)
1.   Thank you, Nigel Evans, for illustrating the Proton accident! Here are two things that may be important to discuss:...
A) orange color - accident of one (of six!) engine - complete or partial failure of the pump supply of the fuel itself (UDMH; 1,1-dimethylhydrazine or Heptyl - H2NN(CH3)2), which means the supply of only one oxidizer, which is nitrogen tetraoxide or N2O4.
B) this results in an asymmetrical rocket twist and an accident in the launch phase. This is about 2 ... 10 km (1.5 ... 6 mi) from the launch complex.
C) I want to pay attention to how the missile breaks down at the end of the flight: First, the head unit with the upper block at the junction with the first and second stages is separated, and then the stages # 1 & 2 themselves break down.
This is a consequence of the high level of Coriollis acceleration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_force) and on the basis of the Nikolai Zhukovsky Rule (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolay_Zhukovsky_(scientist) ).  (who for some reason is my distant relative... :) ).
I wrote about this destruction a long time ago, when I said that a rocket cannot bend at a large angle without damaging its structure. It was in contrast to the claims that ... "the rocket accidentally deviated from its course and flew to the Dyatlov Pass ...". That can't be because the missile's trajectories were calculated in other directions.
Therefore, one may not consider the missile accident as the cause of the events at the Dyatlov Pass because there are no signs of it. Besides, there is no evidence that there was a launch that could have led to a hit there. R-7 missiles that could have flown at the available real range were launched in a completely different direction (from Kazakhstan to Kamchatka), while there were no other missiles that had the right range at the time.
PS. I don't understand at all: what does talking about missiles have to do with "Is this a record of Yuri K limping”?

I'll raise the stakes....

(Just keep in mind "we, here in Russia, people are poor - because all the rich Russians are not in Russia :) according to your media information - partly owned by rich Russians :) " - we do not have such money :). We have everything measured in kilograms! That's £2.5 :) ).


 

That's the kind of money I was talking about.

Hi WAB.
Ok coriolis and aerodynamic forces perhaps.  kewl1

It's not only possible, it's even more than a fact - it was fully... Agreed rockets are not robust wrt lateral forces.

PS. I don't understand at all: what does talking about missiles have to do with "Is this a record of Yuri K limping”?It's about reverse engineering the problem, starting at the end result and asking what could cause this?

It's okay. Unless there are empty conversations without taking into account the real facts... I mean, the complete absence of these "reverse engineering problems" and the works associated with them. Conversations – it were, and facts exist = 0. Zinaida's face is one fact.

The various injuries and apparent sickness are an extremely good fit for hydrazine - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrazine - "Hydrazine exposure can cause skin irritation/contact dermatitis and burning, irritation to the eyes/nose/throat, nausea/vomiting, shortness of breath, pulmonary edema, headache, dizziness, central nervous system depression, lethargy, temporary blindness, seizures and coma.".

That's good, but why talk about something that wasn't available at the time. Rockets with Heptyl fuel and nitrogen-containing oxidizing agents started to be used only 1.5 years later. And the time machine wasn't invented until now. :) No need for a time machine, My rocket is an early prototype :). You don't commit to a ICBM program with a new fuel technology without some testing - http://www.astronautix.com/u/udmh.html - "[size=0]Development of UDMH in the Soviet Union began in 1949."[/size]

 
In particular -  Zinaida was found with her face covered in blood and the morgue photos show the sores that caused that. How else could she have got these other than from some chemical agent?

Ooh! Dear Nigel Evans, why are you changing concepts? She had a moderate amount of blood near her face. That's easy to get if you stumble on how many surfaces at night. The conditions there were more than anything. Ok you translate it for me - https://sites.google.com/site/hibinaud/home/protokol-osmotra-mesta-proissestvia - Google translate says - "Face in blood"
By the way, there are no signs of chemical exposure in the photos and the doctor did not mark even the smallest signs in the protocol.
True, the pathologist stated grazes and abrasions for the condition of Zina's face. But i would argue that grazes and abrasions should show some signs of direction of abrasion. But there aren't any, instead there is only uniform blotching. And how is it possible to abrade the skin of the eyelid protected by an eye socket without damaging the eyebrow? I can only determine that the pathologist was incorrect for whatever reason.



Toboganning head first using her face as brake? Igor had vomited and was bleeding from his ears and mouth?

It could have been very easy there. I can only explain it very clearly to you standing on that very slope in winter. I won't even have to tell you anything. You'll see everything very clearly for yourself. As said above. We have a saying in English - "The camera doesn't lie".

YuriD's pulmonary edema is a fit although hypothermia is another of course.

Why are you saying things that aren't on the court physician's report? It's either inaccurate translations or just fantasies on a loose subject. Yuri Doroshenko's gray substance is only the result of the melted snow in his mouth when he was lying in the forest, when it was transported to Ivdel city, and when this snow melted. This is often the case with bodies that were found under the snow. Like those who were caught in an avalanche. He died above the snow? I've seen it several times in other similar searches. There's no need for any pulmonary edema. Although with the frost that was during the events and the intense work it could be exact. But there's no such indication in the report. There's no need to speculate for a doctor, you can't see it in front of you. The autopsy reports "foamy grey fluid on the cheek and mouth" and "when sectioned the lung tissue is of a dark color, when pressed a large quantity of liquid dark blood and foamy liquid flows from the opening of the incision". There's a lot foamy liquid around this guy, both internally and externally. I'm not qualified to go further. Perhaps you are :).

And then we come on to YuriK's burns and in particular his charred toe. How is it possible to carbonise just one side of just one toe?

Have you ever lost the sensitivity of your fingers, like your hands, for a long time in a severe frost? Especially if it was a borderline condition near frostbite? I've seen it many times during my winter journeys and I've never seen it myself. My hands can't feel anything (my legs can't feel either). I saw a lady taking a bucket by the arc, which was heated up very strongly, but I didn't feel a strong burn while carrying this bucket 2...3 meters (that's about 10 feet), while traveling on the Kola Peninsula in the next group. Only then did she feel the burn. It was already a third-degree burn. There were blisters and a slight necrosis of the surface tissue. But she was in a normal state of mind, she didn't have a cloudy state of consciousness, which Georgy Krivonishchenko must have had. They worked very hard in the cold and were tired. Additionally, they could turn off the consciousness when they lit the fire and got the first signs of heat. It's very relaxing. In science it's called thermal relaxation. You haven't replied to my point, "how do you carbonise just one side of one toe?".


Then there's the burnt firs at the treeline. Ivanov chose directed heat rays, i now prefer the rocket fuel theory. Curiously if both propellant components met in the air they would ignite into a fire orb....

Except Ivanov (and it was he who spoke 35 years after the events), no one knows about it and has not seen anything like it, although they have been on the spot for much longer than Ivanov himself.
It is not serious to talk about fuel and fireballs, if the very fact of the rocket is absent at all. On rumors and gossip can build any number of erroneous versions, only who would need it? The most important thing - why do you need it?
The "fireballs" themselves have already been clearly identified by the search participants as a result of launching missiles at a very long distance - several thousand kilometers or miles. There are no events that coincide in time with the accuracy of minutes, which should be explained more fabulous than it actually is.
It must be the fire orbs then :).
Then there's strange marks on the bodies, photos of YuriK and Igor both showing curved lines that terminate in a perpendicular stripe. Caused by metal fragments of a repeating pattern?

I didn't get it. Tell me more about what you wanted to say with this?
 



Good fencing with you.
Best Regards.
 

February 29, 2020, 02:34:26 AM
Reply #42
Offline

Nigel Evans


Further points to WAB :-
  • there were reports of orange snow? note that watermelon snow algae is red and the associated snow appears pink.

If you are talking about reddish Chlamydomonas nivalis seeds, whose cells are thickly filled with red pigment? We have seen such reddish fields many times not only on the pass, but in many other places as well.  They appear only on hard snow (nast) and increase in colour closer to spring. What does it have to do with the death of Dyatlov's group?



   
  • YuriD's jumper was disintegrating and covered in orange powder?

Where'd you get that from? There was even talk of some kind of purple shade, but there was nothing else but talk.
https://dyatlovpass.com/igor-makushkin?lid=1"Then mother brought Yuri's things. And what was there? Not much. We lived very poorly. For 4 years of study, mother somehow managed to get him a coat because all he had was a jacket. This is in the freezing Sverdlovsk. Unthinkable. And she sent him a coat. And this when Yuri was no longer alive. How did mom cried.  I remember that she was telling and showing a sweatshirt and a sweater, both ruined. Tinted with orange powder.""So far, this version still does not convince me to the end. After all, the algae itself turns red, and the puddles are orange. It is necessary to conduct an experiment by staining dark things in this algae to find out if the red color turns to orange over time, and in what form and color it is stored on dark clothes. If dark cotton clothing is stained with orange, then this issue can be considered closed. It will be one secret less."

By the way, do you know where those conversations came from?
Another question: Did you ever see the color of a fresh corpse that had just been dug out of the snow?
If you haven't, here's a photo:



It is that from rocket fuel, too? :)It's a good theory! :)

   
  • Semyon's plane2 photo is so named because it looks like an aerodynamic structure?

1. This photo is not of Semen, but of different Valentin Yakimenko's considerations, which have nothing to do with any picture.
2. This is a strong increase in the hyposulfite crystal on the film, because it was not washed well. Since the storage of such films for several decades, these crystals sometimes appear. The size of such a crystal is a few tenths of a millimeter, or hundredths of an inch. Next to the perforation window of the film, they seem gigantic. Like this:





It is that the famous "Plane"?
These are common defects on the film when it is stored for a long time. This is quite clear to anyone who has taken film photography before digital photography appeared.I don't accept that Plane2 is a defect. It even has signs of graupel melting on the lens (twice). Some coincidence for random damage.
 


The width of the film perforation window is 0.11 in. A crystal called "Airplane" is about 20 times that size.

   
  • Lyudmila's yellow brown face / white chin suggests chemical exposure? Unlikely to be sunburn....

This is not an argument at all. In a medical study in May, she didn't have half of her facial tissue at all. What color is there to talk about?The autopsy states "yellow/brown face" and her morgue photo clearly shows a white chin.

   
  • the tent has many tears on one side and only one on the other side suggesting an asymmetry of degradation?

It shows that the wind carried the sparks from the furnace exhaust into that line. And nothing else. Hitting the tent with rocket fuel burns it completely. It depends on the concentration.

   
  • after the discovery of the tent one of the first actions of the military is to sweep the area with metal detectors commanded by a senior staff officer (Lt Colonel)?

That was far from the first action. Soldiers of the railway troops arrived at the place together with the second or even third shift of the search participants. This is a traditional military mistake: to bring mine detectors and search under deep snow for people who have almost no metal objects. This was the case in my practice several times when the military was given the command to participate in the search. Never once did they find anything, but they have always acted with mine detectors. By the way, the lieutenant colonel himself did not come to the pass, he was in Ivdel city, where the headquarters of the battalion of railway troops was located. They were building a railroad from Ivdel to the Ob River. Soldiers of the railway troops were on the pass for a short time. There was a man with the same first name on the pass - Shestopalov - in the third group of search participants. He was a student at the UPI University.
You can't build theories based on rumors and conversations only. That's the way to a dead end. That's interesting information.
 

February 29, 2020, 03:00:48 AM
Reply #43
Offline

Nigel Evans


.........................................
For me the key thing is finding THE narrative, the one that explains ALL the evidence. Not just some of it. There's 75 plus narratives that can do that.

The number of theories is not an approximation to the truth. Rather, it is the opposite. This is the case when a lot of garbage is thrown on a small number of necessary objects.
So that's a very controversial statement. Yes agreed, you may have misunderstood my point. Quantity is not quality.

Hence the missile theory, the problem with the ball lightning theory is that it's very good at explaining say 98% albeit with a somewhat low probability but not 100%. But the missile theory can explain everything. The big problem with it is that it requires an explanation for the lack of debris which makes certain members here scoff.  afraid7

If you know well about rockets or ball lightning, it doesn't explain anything, because it immediately leads to contradictions when something is said that wasn't there at all, or at the time the conversation is going on.
As for the missile debris on the ground, that is the best proof that there were no missiles. Even in the XVIII century proved a simple natural wisdom: nothing disappears into nowhere, and nothing of anything appears. Mysticism is only a form of imagination in individuals, but has no proof in nature.The missile theory is challenged by the lack of debris argument. A cleanup operation is the only solution. Curiously my best guess at the ravine deaths is crushed by a tracked vehicle suggesting that the military were onsite post the event..

But hovering helicopters leave snow rings....

If you know the aerodynamics of helicopters well, you wouldn't make such claims. Helicopters has never left such rings. It's a myth invented by those who only know about helicopters that he's seen them from afar.
I'm thinking of a snow version of this Chinook in dust photo -

The turbo prop exhaust warming the snow making it stick at the perimeter.
 
« Last Edit: February 29, 2020, 03:06:27 AM by Nigel Evans »
 

February 29, 2020, 08:42:25 AM
Reply #44
Offline

MDGross


The exploding missile scenario explains why the group would flee the tent and how some of the injuries might have occurred. I agree with some of the others that it seems all nine hikers would have been enveloped and suffered significant injuries. Even a very localized rain shower that covers only one square mile would have been felt by all the hikers. Surely toxic rocket fumes carried on the wind would cover one square mile. But, that's just my opinion and may be completely wrong.

I have a difficult time believing in any execution/murder theory. Why would the group be allowed to flee to the trees, build a fire and dig a snow den? It just doesn't make sense. So we're left with exploding missiles, rockets or bombs, or a naturally occurring phenomenon such as an avalanche (or what they believed was an avalanche), gravity wind, infrasound or a snow slab. But once again, no eyewitnesses and no known reports. All we do know is that poor judgement was used in pitching the tent in such an unprotected and vulnerable location. We also know from photos and diary entries that the weather was extremely harsh even without gale-force winds. Unless by some miracle, documentation is found that can substantiate what happened that night, everything else will remain speculation. 
 

February 29, 2020, 10:34:55 AM
Reply #45
Offline

Nigel Evans


The exploding missile scenario explains why the group would flee the tent and how some of the injuries might have occurred. I agree with some of the others that it seems all nine hikers would have been enveloped and suffered significant injuries. Even a very localized rain shower that covers only one square mile would have been felt by all the hikers. Surely toxic rocket fumes carried on the wind would cover one square mile. But, that's just my opinion and may be completely wrong.
This is what Ivanov stated 30 years later - https://dyatlovpass.com/lev-ivanov?lid=1we found that some young trees on the forest tree line have traces of burning, but they are not in concentric shape or any other system. There was no epicenter. This once again confirmed a source of heat ray or completely unknown to us energy acting selectively - the snow was not melted, the trees were not damaged. It seemed like when the hikers walked on their feet more than five hundred meters down from the mountain, someone dealt with some of them as direct targets.If there was some aggressive chemical mist being blown down the mountain the first organic life it would encounter (other than the hikers) would be the treeline. But Ivanov talks of "a ray" without any system. So my interpretation is that within the missile theory the fuel was being blown down the mountain as streaks, not as say a cloud. This makes it quite plausible that some would be lucky and some not.
                           
[/q]
I have a difficult time believing in any execution/murder theory. Why would the group be allowed to flee to the trees, build a fire and dig a snow den? It just doesn't make sense. So we're left with exploding missiles, rockets or bombs, or a naturally occurring phenomenon such as an avalanche (or what they believed was an avalanche), gravity wind, infrasound or a snow slab. But once again, no eyewitnesses and no known reports. All we do know is that poor judgement was used in pitching the tent in such an unprotected and vulnerable location. We also know from photos and diary entries that the weather was extremely harsh even without gale-force winds. Unless by some miracle, documentation is found that can substantiate what happened that night, everything else will remain speculation.
 

February 29, 2020, 12:12:01 PM
Reply #46
Offline

MDGross


I've read the Ivanov interview and he was of the belief that a manned or unmanned UFO was the source of the heat rays. These rays could target selected individual hikers. I guess missile fuel could blow down the mountain in small streams or streaks. From seeing video of missile/rocket explosions over the years, I've seen lots of fiery debris come down in bright streaks, but don't know about fuel. Perhaps there is video of airplanes dumping fuel in an emergency landing. Maybe that would show streaks of falling fuel.
 

March 01, 2020, 02:21:22 AM
Reply #47
Offline

Nigel Evans


If a rocket crashed on the western side of the Urals upwind of the tent you would have a theory that explains the lack of debris, fireorbs in the sky and streaking.


 

March 01, 2020, 05:50:02 AM
Reply #48
Offline

Nigel Evans


So i was thinking... How can a crashed rocket be leaking both fuel components and not just explode in a great big boom?


and then i thought, if the high winds reproduced the effect of smoke trails in a wind tunnel then that would give you the separation.

e.g. -

Where the aerofoil confuses the streams you would get a fireorb, but crucially away from the source of the fuel. So there wouldn't be a catastrophic explosion but a steady state situation that could persist for minutes maybe 10 or even 20 minutes?

But then how do they get their injuries? These marks that seem to be of a repeating pattern?


Cue the next video -

Lots of rockets going boom here, including the Proton M previously but go to 7.04 and watch this Titan exploding and ask yourself what could happen to someone under that fallout. Now in high winds perpendicular to gravity the lightest objects "bits of shrapnel" would travel far downstream in shallow paths hitting people side on.

So the narrative is that a rocket doesn't go into a steep dive but hits the ground in a shallow descent on favourably angled terrain (deep snow?) that doesn't catastrophically rupture it's tanks (crash lands).Both fuels are leaking but streamed by the high winds for long enough to force them out of the tent and get them down the slope before the big explosion.


It's a good fit!
 

March 01, 2020, 06:05:51 AM
Reply #49
Offline

Nigel Evans


Here's another rocket fail video, checkout from 9.03.
 


 
Aluminum confetti?
 

March 01, 2020, 06:08:41 AM
Reply #50
Offline

Nigel Evans


Trying youtube link again, main action from 10.00.
 

March 01, 2020, 09:08:02 AM
Reply #51
Offline

MDGross


So a missile traveling at Mach 1 or faster can make a belly landing of sorts on a rocky slope? I don't think so. An exploding missile does create a perfect fireball though. One that would fill up almost an entire frame of a photo such as the one found in Zolotaryov's camera.
 

March 01, 2020, 09:34:15 AM
Reply #52
Offline

Nigel Evans


So a missile traveling at Mach 1 or faster can make a belly landing of sorts on a rocky slope? I don't think so. An exploding missile does create a perfect fireball though. One that would fill up almost an entire frame of a photo such as the one found in Zolotaryov's camera.
Definately not mach 1 :).
Depending on altitude a rocket that has had a complete engine failure against high winds would fall at terminal velocity with modest forward speed over ground, potentially even zero, the plane2 object has large fins/wings which could act as air brakes with the correct orientation. Then if the major component of it's velocity vector is vertical and the wings are generating lift and it hits a snowy sloping mountain side then you have the ingredients for a crash landing. The burya had wings.

If you're struggling with the above read - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vesna_Vulovi%C4%87

However. If like me you consider the plane2 photo to be a genuine photo "of something in a snowstorm", then that something has a very strong source of illumination which suggests multiple rockets with one already a fireball. So the theory doesn't need leakage from just one rocket. As i've previously suggested pitting buryas against S-75s using kholat as a firing range would explain a lot.
« Last Edit: March 01, 2020, 09:39:31 AM by Nigel Evans »
 

March 01, 2020, 01:57:13 PM
Reply #53
Offline

Monty


At the risk of shooting your fox. What happened to the debris?
 

March 01, 2020, 04:15:09 PM
Reply #54
Offline

Nigel Evans


At the risk of shooting your fox. What happened to the debris?
Shoot away, that's why we're here.
The big problem with the missile theory isn't what happened to the debris (there is a case for a clean-up operation)  but why did they let civilians near the area?The Soviet army was massive no need for the manpower.
 

March 02, 2020, 05:02:58 AM
Reply #55
Offline

Monty


So a better question would be could all the civilians that helped locate the hikers be expected to never mention what they saw?
 

March 02, 2020, 05:05:28 AM
Reply #56
Offline

Nigel Evans


So a better question would be could all the civilians that helped locate the hikers be expected to never mention what they saw?
No it's more bizarre than that :) - https://dyatlovpass.com/askinadzi?rbid=18461
 

March 02, 2020, 05:28:06 AM
Reply #57
Offline

Monty


So from that interview either there was a wayward rocket or it was invented to satisfy the curious. Confusing. If I had to choose between the two, not sure. An elaborate cover story with no wreckage or a spectacular event but again no wreckage. Am I missing something obvious?
 

March 02, 2020, 06:24:25 AM
Reply #58
Offline

Nigel Evans


So from that interview either there was a wayward rocket or it was invented to satisfy the curious. Confusing. If I had to choose between the two, not sure. An elaborate cover story with no wreckage or a spectacular event but again no wreckage. Am I missing something obvious?
It could depend on the size of the missile. An S-75 is only 10 metres in length and the second stage looks to be two thirds so only 6-7metres long. It uses nitric acid and kerosene as fuel. Multiple S-75s might work. Not a lot of debris for the snow to hide.
 

March 02, 2020, 06:47:07 AM
Reply #59
Offline

Monty


So perhaps the elaborate cover story was in fact the truth, in some way.