Versions of the death of the Dyatlov's group (criminal)

Criminal versions vary very much in details, but at the same time they agree in one: the death of the members of Igor Dyatlov's group was the result of the malicious intent of a group of people. All oddities found both at the site of installation of the tent, and below, at the cedar, are determined in the opinion of the supporters of these versions either by the circumstances of the attack, or are imitation ("staging") of unknown assassins.
   Unlike previous categories, this type of hypotheses take into account much more information and therefore are better reasoned. In this sense, their analysis is not only interesting, but also useful, given the thematic focus of this essay.
   So, let's consider the basic versions in order:
   1) The death of Igor Dyatlov's group was the result of the erroneous actions of the special forces of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the USSR ("mop-up groups"). The essence of this hypothesis boils down to the fact that soldiers and officers of some "special forces of the Ministry of Internal Affairs" were taken for a group of Sverdlovsk tourists for fleeing criminals. Say, valiant but stupid Soviet commandos, the leaders of some unnamed ITK (correctional labor colony) were sent to chase after escaped convicts, and soldiers, stumbling on the slope of Holat-Syahyl on the tent of tourists, decided that they overtook the fugitives. "Dyatlovtsy" inadvertently sang the thieves' songs, the words of which they found out during the hike (in one of the diaries of tourists there is a corresponding entry), so the SWAT soldiers, without hesitation, attacked the tent, hacked it during the assault and killed some of the tourists. After the situation cleared up and the servicemen realized that the innocent had died because of their fault, they decided to finish off the others and cover up the tracks. "The sweeping of traces" they organized in the manner that the prosecutors saw at the end of February.
   An important circumstance for understanding the internal logic of this version is that in sweeping the tracks the leaders of the blunt-headed special forces took an active part. These leaders decided to completely cover the killers in epaulets, for which they organized a real "cover-up operation" with the involvement of the forces and resources of another department - the Ministry of Defense. The bodies of the deceased tourists were first taken from the pass by a military helicopter, and then, at the end of the month they were brought back. It was the preservation of the bodies of the dead in different conditions that, in the opinion of the proponents of this version, determined the different degree of decomposition of the corpses. And the reluctance of helicopter carriers to remove bodies found in May in a ravine is treated as confirmation of the fact that the helicopter pilots were well aware of the true degree of decomposition of bodies sewn into tarpaulins. A serious argument in favor of the fact that tourists were killed by Soviet servicemen is the "discovery" of the "fact" that the fractures of the ribs of Zolotarev and Dubinina correspond to the dimensions of the stub part (butt) of the butt of the Kalashnikov assault rifle. But in fact, the fact is not at all a fact, but the butt of the AK-47 butt is known to be larger than the sites of damage on their bodies (in the case of assembly machines of those years its length was 130 mm). In addition, the butt of the machine for the classification of forensic medicine of those years fell into the category of "blunt object with a tused surface", one of the four types of blunt hand weapons that the forensic physician should be able to distinguish (here we again turn to the basic textbook of forensic medicine M.I Raiskyi, according to which the Vozrozdenyi studied, there such a classification is given on pp.105-106). Even if the forensic expert did not recognize the imprint of the butt of the butt of the butt on the skin, he would have managed to classify the trace (which, however, did not happen).

All the flaws of the investigation conducted by Lev Nikitovich Ivanov are clearly perceived by the proponents of the version as malicious "entanglement of traces." Information that in January-February 1959 shoots from the objects of the Ivdelsky ITK were not recorded, is regarded as falsified and rejected immediately. In general, everything that has official sources is perceived as either deliberately distorted or completely false, but all sorts of rumors, memories and family legends are taken for granted as the ultimate truth.
   For the reader to understand what is at stake, you can give a couple of examples (in fact, there are many more such examples, but for their detailed analysis it will be necessary to prepare an essay not in size of 200 thousand characters, but 10 times more, but to fight someone else's stupidity It's a trite pity for time). The memory of a member of the search operation was vividly discussed, which told that in the tent of the "dyatlovites" the search engines slept for several nights - there were no large cuts in it, and small ones were easily sewn up. In support of this legend, other anonymous memories are given, from which it follows that the tent was delivered to the Ivdlinsky UVD building in good condition and the incisions appeared later. Another very popular line of discussion within the framework of the version of the "cleansing group" is to find evidence that the Djatlov group was attacked not on February 1, but later, and not on the slope of Holatchahl, but after reaching the mountain Oorten. With evidence, however, sparsely. One of them is that the newspaper "Evening Otterten" students would sit down to compose after conquering the summit, and not before. Another is based on the memoirs of Moses Abramovich Axelrod, the participant of the search operation, who knew Igor Dyatlov well. He in one of the television interviews shortly before his death in 1991 reported that "in the far corner of the tent was a diary with the date of the last entry - February 2, 1959" (the existence of such a diary is not confirmed by official documents). Accordingly, the tent on the slope of Holatchahl and the strange disposition of cedar are just a game of malicious falsifiers.
   In principle, the assumption of the death of the group on the way back - after passing Ottenen - deserves careful analysis and should not be dismissed from the start. However, there are no serious arguments in his favor, on the contrary, there are facts directly contradicting him (the absence of entries in the diaries of the participants of the campaign, the safety of the products, which on the way back to the storage house must inevitably come to an end). By the way, the allegedly large food reserves of the group are also interpreted by the supporters of the version as a sign of falsification, they say, the killers decided to be "reinsured" in military terms than to "be uninsured", and therefore allocated surplus funds, compensating for the expense. By "excess amount of products" is usually understood as 3 kg. sugar, left "dyatlovites" in the storage; However, such a reserve from the calculation of a 2-week campaign of 10 people (do not forget the ill Yudin, who also made the product layout) can hardly be considered excessive.

In general, in this version we see a classic conspiracy design - Power (unpersonalized and faceless) deceives its people, treats it like a blind kitten, well, the creators of the version and its supporters act in the honorable role of detachees of all kinds of covers.
   What can you say on the merits? This painting is based on a picturesque design on numerous "expositions of the Soviet era," examples of which are familiar to everyone living in today's Russia. This version is very modern, both in the assessments of the Soviet past, and the uttermost misunderstanding by its authors and supporters of the realities that existed in the USSR.
   And the realities were such that no "special forces of the Ministry of Internal Affairs" or "group of mopping-up" in February 1959 on the slope of Holat-Syahyl (or Ottoten) could not be in principle. Because:
   - in 1959 the "special forces of the Ministry of Internal Affairs" did not exist at all. In the sense that modern supporters of the version put into this phrase, it could be so-called. "Prison special forces," that is, a subdivision of internal troops of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, designed to press riots and protests in places of deprivation of liberty. At present such a duty rests with the special units of the territorial offices of the Federal Penitentiary Service (FSIN RF) of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation. However, the "prison special forces", which existed in the Soviet era, incidentally, unofficially, began to appear with large "krytki" only in the 80's. They were just the most physically strong staff workers who were supposed to clean up the first signals of disobedience of the "special contingent". They never engaged in gunfights and shootings, and nobody demanded this from them. Let's recollect the textbook history with the seizure of controllers in St. Petersburg's "Crosses" in February 1992 - once the hostages appeared, comrades from the prison guards (then they were servicemen of the MVD Interior Ministry) were immediately invited by the city OMON. In 1959, there were simply no "specially trained skiers" in the ITC states to chase after the runaway cons in the forest;

- a technology to catch fleeing criminals in the mid-50's. The last century did not require enchanting feats in the bosom of nature. The prosecution team, composed of the most experienced and physically trained staff members of the ITC and IDF soldiers, could only prosecute the perpetrators "in hot pursuit" and only in uninhabited areas. In fact, the persecution was conducted before sunset and certainly ceased in the dark. The group returned to the territory of the ITK not because the chiefs of the "zone" were cowards, but because life experience prompted that escaped prisoners could use the night time to destroy the persecution group itself. Especially, if criminals at escape have taken possession of fire-arms. If the hot runaways failed to "take", the fugitives' orientations were passed on to the nearest territorial authorities, and they already organized patrols for piers, railway stations, settlements, etc. in the near zone, check of documents on the roads and t Of the event. In other words, even if convicts really fled from the surrounding "camps" in January 1959, no soldiers of the internal troops on the slope of the Holat-Syahyl could appear on February 1 anyway;
   - there is no doubt that the soldiers-conscripts of internal troops, having small arms and having a factor of surprise, would not have started to fight with the fleeing criminals hand-to-hand. They would simply shoot a part of the group at a distance without any risk to themselves. And in case of disobedience of the others - they would shoot the others. This behavior seems to be the only logical and justified from the point of view of common sense. In other words, the incident would immediately begin with shooting, and if there were no shooting, then there would not be an incident - Dyatlov would present his passport to the military, a travel order with the stamp of UPI and a misunderstanding would be settled quickly. Moreover, in the company of 7 young men there were 2 girls - this served as an obvious proof for everyone that the tent was just tourists. But if the incident really happened, then it started unexpectedly for the "woodpeckers" and from the very first seconds caused fatal victims. And this was possible only when shooting at people from firearms. However, as we know for certain, the deceased tourists did not have gunshot wounds;

- we must not forget about the specifics of the late 1950s, which undoubtedly influenced the activity of MVD workers at all levels. The wave of Khrushchev's revelations of crimes of the Stalin era showed that even the most senior leaders of the law enforcement agencies can be sent to trial for the sins of previous years. It should be recalled that under Khrushchev not only Beria and his closest associates were shot, but the workers of the Transcaucasian bodies of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (Tsanava and others), and a considerable part of the high-ranking and well-deserved workers of the central apparatus was expelled from the "bodies". Neither high ranks (Beria was marshal!) Nor political weight (Bagirov was a candidate for the Presidium of the CPSU Central Committee and headed the Communist Party of Azerbaijan for almost 20 years) did not guarantee that the previous sins can not be blamed. It is possible to laugh at many pearls and ill-considered innovations of "dear Nikita Sergeyitch," but one can not help but acknowledge that a significant humanization of the work of the MVD-KGB agencies took place: public prosecutor's supervision increased, requirements for observance of legal norms increased, and the permissiveness of managers at least the middle link). In these conditions, the chief of the "zone", having received a message that his subordinates had mistakenly killed the students, would hardly have worn out, organizing a "cover-up operation." Such actions would unequivocally transform him into an accomplice in a crime that he did not commit (as they say in Odessa: "Does he need it?"). A reasonable leader would simply hasten to "surrender" his slave-slave, who committed such a serious crime, and would calmly work further to the pension itself;
   - Finally, the most important and fundamental objection to all the "conspiracy versions" that accuse the representatives of the Soviet government of murdering tourists (not only the special forces of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, but also the servicemen of the Armed Forces and the KGB). If the Djatlov group had actually been destroyed with the knowledge of the high party and Soviet leadership, then the last for the maskirovsko happened would not have to resort to abstruse "staging" and "staging". Totalitarian Power was not afraid of any revelations simply because it was totalitarian. The bodies of the dead tourists would be sealed in zinc coffins and returned to Sverdlovsk without the right to open. Relatives would be told that the deceased had found a carcass of a deer (lynx, bear, wolverine, etc., depending on the imagination), which was ineptly refreshed. The dead animal was sick with plague (sap, etc., depending, again, on the fantasy of the authors), and tourists, infected with a dangerous disease, died within a few days. A representative of the government would have handed over to the families and loved ones of the dead the protocols of the corresponding examinations with beautiful stamp seals and that would all be over. Nobody would start criminal cases! At all! No examinations of the cut tent, no inventories of the things returned to relatives ... Nothing would be returned, everything was burnt. And there would never have been a history of the mysterious death of UPI students on the slope of Holatchahl, but there would have been a simple, very simple history of students who inadvertently freshened the corpse of a fallen animal and died of its own stupidity. It is important to understand that the Soviet government would not justify itself and mask the deed, because it was never justified, even when they shot people in Novocherkassk in 1961. Because of the grossest violations of safety standards, criminal negligence and stupidity of the authorities in the Armed Forces of the USSR, dozens of people and the Soviet government did not even think about the question: "how to hide the ends?" They returned to the parents of the body of the dead children with the order to bury them in closed coffins and were strongly advised to abstain from anti-Soviet echey. This is the true handwriting of Soviet power.

On this objection to the version of the possible appearance on the slope of Mount Holatchahl, the "cleansing groups" from the interior troops of the Ministry of Internal Affairs can be stopped. Summarizing the foregoing, it should be recognized that such a variant of the development of events contains ineradicable internal contradictions, does not correspond to the realities of that time and is absolutely impossible.
   2) The death of Igor Dyatlov's group was the result of the criminal actions of the Special Forces of the Armed Forces of the USSR (this version is usually called "missile"). This hypothesis can be considered a deep modernization of the previous, "deep" because the motive for the appearance of the Russian special forces has been transformed into something quite incredible.
   We are talking about some top-secret tests in the interests of the Ministry of Defense of the USSR, in the epicenter of which was Igor Dyatlov's group. The tourists who suffered as a result of these tests were found by the special forces who arrived in the area of ​​Kholat-Sahyl, who finished the living and took measures to sweep up the traces of his deed. In the way the footprints swept, the authors and supporters of this theory fully agree with the supporters of the previous version, so we will not dwell on this.
   Let's see what's better with "top-secret tests"? The role of those is predicted by nuclear tests, the testing of vacuum weapons, the testing of a large-caliber air bomb and, finally, the testing of a ballistic missile. We will deal with these Augean stables of "technical marasmus" in order.
   . This is the south of the Komi ASSR, the upper reaches of the river Nem. For the first time, the Americans reported the existence of a test site there in the press release of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) of the Ministry of Energy on October 26, 1954. American technical reconnaissance vehicles registered there at least 7 nuclear explosions carried out from mid-September 1954 to February 1956 (from the 8th to the 14th nuclear explosions in the history of the USSR). In principle, it is not very far from the Djatlov Pass, about 200 km to the west, only through the Ural Mountains it is necessary to pass. So there is a certain logic in suspecting the possibility of a nuclear explosion in the Ottoten area, it seems, is. However, opponents of this version reasonably point out that from November 3, 1958 to September 1, 1961, the Soviet Union did not conduct any nuclear tests, since it complied with the moratorium on such. The moratorium was reciprocal with the United States and its observance was controlled by the technical means of both countries. The fact of a nuclear explosion in the Northern Urals would not have been concealed, even in the case of its low power - the Americans confidently registered explosions of only a few kilotons (for example, an explosion on July 29, 1955, with a capacity of 5 kt or 2 February 1962, with a power range of 10-20 kt.). In the postwar period, the Soviet Union has never been exposed in violation of its obligations to limit or control arms. There is no reason to suspect that on February 1, 1959 Khrushchev suddenly decided to make a single violation of a serious international obligation and sanctioned a low-power nuclear explosion outside the military test site. No political triumphs, no technical breakthroughs such a stupid for any policy trick did not bode well. In addition, a nuclear explosion would lead to more or less uniform radioactive contamination of the clothes of all members of the group, which in fact was not observed. And the bodies of the dead themselves would be noticeably radioactive, since people would have to inhale the decomposition products carried by dust, ash and moisture. And this radiological examination also did not record.

With the evidence of the test of the notorious "vacuum" bomb (a bulk explosion ammunition), things are even worse than with a nuclear explosion. First of all, this type of ammunition appeared much later - in the late 60's. But even this is not the main thing, in the end, you can expect to work off some unsuccessful prototype. The most significant objection to the trials is that the bodies of the victims inevitably had to bear traces of severe injuries caused by barotrauma and exposure to high temperatures. As you know, none of this was noted. In addition, the explosion of a top-secret ammunition outside the test site deprives such "tests" of any meaning. The task of full-scale testing of any weapon is just to detect and fix its essential properties, compare by efficiency criteria with analogues and in practice check the built-in design and technological solutions. It is clear that a single explosion in a remote area of ​​tasks does not solve these problems in principle. Therefore, the military could not conduct such tests in the untrodden mountains of the Northern Urals.
   From the same series of extreme "engineering cretinism," the assumption of a fall on the Hillat-Sahyl slope of a large-caliber test bomb. Like, the bomb dropped in the dark, she fell higher on the slope, swept the tent and the stabilizer caused injuries to Thibaut, Zolotarev and Dubinina. And the explosion did not happen, because the munition was test, without the filling of explosives. It is not necessary to laugh - this nonsense was seriously discussed at one of the forums and since its participants doubted that the bomb had a "tail", the amateur author of this nonsense even applied a sketch of a bomb with stabilizers. And when the author of this essay, trying not to offend the participants in the discussion, politely invited them to think about the difference between plastic and elastic deformations, they simply did not understand me. However, this is only in jokes about the "rubber bomb dropped on China" bombs jump and jump. If such an ammunition fell on the slope of Holatchahl, he would simply knock out a funnel in the ground, crumple his thin-walled shell and not roll anywhere. Even a centimeter would not have moved. Such a bomb could harm the Djatlov group only by landing directly into the tent, which, as we know, did not happen.
   Finally, the most popular version of all the technogenic ones is the version of the fall of the ballistic missile on the slope of Holat-Sahyl, the poisoning of tourists with poisonous components of fuel (an oxidizer and fuel), the subsequent appearance of the "cosmodrome spetsnaz" at the site of the fall and stripping it of the terrain. In support of this version, everything that is possible is weaved, even those evidences whose meaning the supporters of this hypothesis themselves do not understand. If you follow their fantasies, it turns out that the light purple color of the clothes of the four found in the ravine are traces of rocket fuel, the strange color of the skin of the deceased - a sign of poisoning by the vapor of fuel components, green fir felled from the cedar - evidence that the "Dyatlovites" poisoning, sections of the tent - an indication of flight from the working rocket step falling from the sky ... And to the question, where is the same rocket-killer? supporters of the version answer, as they say, on the blue eye: the special forces have taken out! That's exactly: the slope was cleared, the students finished off, the rocket was taken away, and the February snowfall traces the work perfectly.

Despite attempts of the collective mind of the creators of this version to back it up with technical details, any refinement only reveals its uttermost failure. Let us briefly mention some of the many dozens of contradictions in this hypothesis:
   - although the cosmodrome in the Plesetsk region (during construction - the object "Angara") began to be built in January 1957, by February 1, 1959, it had not yet been launched. This means that a ballistic missile could arrive either from Baikonur or Kapustin Yar. The latter can also be turned off from consideration, since at that time this object was tied to the operational-tactical missiles, the routes of the same missile flight launched from Baikonur lie much south of the Urals, and pass through the Dzhezkazgan and Altai regions. Staff launches of ballistic missiles in the northern direction from Baikonur have never been carried out, because of the presence of large cities in the north - Perm, Chelyabinsk, Sverdlovsk, etc .;
   - The abnormal operation of the carrier rocket launched from Baikonur can be completely ruled out. First of all, we point out that the first R-7 missiles, the range of which made it possible to reach the North Ural, had an autonomous control system that was duplicated by a radio command (from the ground). In the event of failure of an autonomous system, the control of the missile was assumed by the operator, who did not allow deviation from the course. In the event of failure of both control systems, and with a subsequent deviation of the rocket by roll, pitch or yaw by 7 ° from the calculated angle, it self-destructed. Initially, the self-destruction was carried out by switching off the engines, and subsequently - by rocket blowing. Thus. R-7 was fully insured against any significant deviation from the course at the launch, which confirmed the long-term practice of operating both the missile itself and its modifications;
   - "cosmodrome spetsnaz" never existed, the protection of cosmodromes at all times of the existence of the Soviet Union was borne by the most ordinary soldiers of conscripts. They were never involved in the search for places where the accelerating stages of carrier rockets fell;

- After the October 1957 Plenum of the Central Committee of the CPSU, removed from the posts of GK Zhukov (who was before the Minister of Defense) and SM Shtemenko (was head of the GRU of the General Staff), there was a sharp reduction in special forces in the Armed Forces of the USSR. If in the creation of special forces in 1950, 46 separate special-purpose companies were organized in the army, district and navy, then after the October 1957 Plenum there were only six in the peripheral districts, which were in a high degree of readiness for the start of hostilities. All the internal military districts of the USSR lost special forces units. The reason for this reform was the fear of the political leadership of the country (personally Khrushchev, aware of his own unpopularity among the military) before using the military commanders of special forces for the purpose of a coup. The military special forces were categorically forbidden to take part in operations on the territory of the USSR. When riots broke out in Novocherkassk in 1961, the Ministry of Defense was forced to use the most conventional combat motorized rifle units to suppress them, since the closest division of the special forces was almost 1 thousand kilometers to the south, in Armenia. The appearance of military special forces on the North. The Urals in February 1959 is absolutely impossible;
      The Soviet special forces in the opinion of many ardent "explorers" of the tragedy of Igor Dyatlov's group are such geeks, which "crumble in cabbage" of Soviet people were always a pleasure. Watching the domestic "blackies" of recent years, these "researchers" seriously believe that the soldiers and officers of the Soviet special forces first crushed skulls and ribs and only then they thought with their heads. These mythmakers, before fooling around, it would make sense to at least a little study the history of the issue, about which they undertake to judge. And then, you see, they would have been surprised to learn that in January 1959, in the Soviet Union, there was not even a single division of special forces capable of appearing in the mountains of the Northern Urals. The Ministry of Internal Affairs and the KGB did not have units of the appropriate profile in their composition, and the GRU of the General Staff of the Ministry of Defense kept its units only in frontier districts and groups of troops.

- It is also absolutely impossible to have an appearance in the vicinity of Kholat-Sahyl and "KGB special forces". As a result of several transformations of the post-Stalinist era, the famous Bureau No. 1 (for sabotage abroad), which existed in the MGB as a separate department and had a staff of 1 thousand people, degenerated into the 13th department of the 1st Main Directorate with only 82 personnel people. The fall in the significance of this unit is clearly seen in the lowering of the rank of its leader: if PA Sudoplatov was a lieutenant-general, IA Fadeikin, who headed the department in 1959, was only a colonel. This special forces could not be used inside the country in accordance with the Regulations on the department, and its application outside the USSR could take place only upon the written instruction of the highest state leadership. Deeply classified by the Bureau No. 2 of the MGB of the USSR (focused on "carrying out special assignments within the USSR to suppress special hostile activities carried out by individuals"), under the leadership of Major-General VA Drozdov, on whose activities we will dwell in this essay was formally disbanded on September 1, 1953. Although the personnel of this large unit remained in the KGB states and the methods and operational skills of the disappeared Bureau were not lost, yet the appearance of specialists of this profile on Holat-Sjahyl should be considered absolutely impossible. Bureau number 2 - is a city special forces, "sharpened" under the action in the urban environment and absolutely useless for combat work in the taiga on skis. In this sense, even the most drunken and blind to both eyes Mansi hunter was a "special forces commander" to a greater extent than the bones of the Bureau number 2;
   - in the Soviet Union, there was no practice at all to collect the parts of launch vehicles that fell to the ground, in view of the utter senselessness of this occupation (picking scrap metal in an untrodden deaf man and taking it out from a financial point of view does not justify itself). Only in the 90's. In the last century, at the request of international and domestic environmental organizations, plans (and began their partial implementation) for the ecological renovation of fields for the fall of spent stages of missiles and removal of parts of the latter for disposal. By the way, not always the collection of fragments of rockets passed quietly - local residents often did not want to part with the "hardware" needed in the farm, especially head fairings of large diameter and complained about the actions of "scrap collectors";
   - oxygen-kerosene rocket engines do not pose a great danger for people in the area of ​​fall, but the engines of ballistic missiles, on toxic heptyl in 1959 did not exist. By the way, the poisonousness of the latter is also greatly exaggerated by non-specialists, its maximum permissible concentration (MPC) is only 20 below that of a familiar ammonia. Demonstrating the danger of heptyl missiles, representatives of environmental organizations operate with the artificial notion of "planned fuel shedding at the point of fall," which in fact does not express anything. In the value of the "planned strait" they record the remains of fuel in the tanks, which can not be chosen by the fusible reinforcement due to its design features. At the same time, ecologists believe that all fuel will fall into the ground and air in the area of ​​the fall. The remains of this fuel can in fact be quite significant, for the Cyclone-3 rocket, for example, they are 616 kg. heptyl for the first stage and 215 kg. - for the second. But there is really no significant contamination of the site at the point of fall due to the fact that the steps lose their tightness at a high altitude, often with an explosion, so that in the worst case a few buckets of fuel fall into the ground. Careful studies have shown that already 100 m from the place where any overclocking stage falls, the presence of heptyl is not detected either in water, in soil, or in plants. Thus. even if we assume that the accelerating stage of the unknown "heptyl" rocket fell on the slope of the Holat-Sahyl, then for the chemical damage of the "woodpeckers" this should happen in the immediate vicinity of the tent. However, none of the search engines in the pass area observed traces of the fall from the high altitude of the multi-ton rocket fragments;

- even if we consider that some Heptyl rocket still fell near the tent on the slope of the Holatchahl and the members of the tourist group Dyatlova received a chemical defeat from the fuel spill, it is completely incomprehensible why the non-existent "cosmodrome spetsnaz" had to kill them. Practices such "sweeps" of its own population, either before 1959 or after, did not exist. A suitable example is the case of the fall of January 26, 1983, a carrier rocket near the village of Brin-Navolok in the Kholmogory district of the Arkhangelsk region. The Ministry of Defense conducted a large rescue operation there, took out the villagers, but it never occurred to anyone to shoot or arrange for the witnesses of the catastrophe that had occurred in the prisons. One can also recall the catastrophe of the strategic rocket R-16 in October 1960 at Baikonur, as a result of which the first Commander-in-Chief of the Strategic Missile Force, Chief Marshal of Artillery Mitrofan Ivanovich Nedelin was killed. Few people know that the people involved in the mystery of this tragedy were people who did not have access to secret information at all - hospital workers, where the injured were brought, and residents of the railway station Tyratam, mostly Kazakhs, who did not have the slightest relation to the cosmodrome. And what? The KGB did not shoot anyone, did not sit down "on kutuzkam" and did not even select subscriptions for non-disclosure - people themselves understood the power of the state secret that protects them and protects this secret KGB;
   - The S-75 anti-aircraft missile, adopted in November 1957 and having a second-stage liquid engine, could not be on the slope of the Holat-Sahyl because of its short range (29 km at the first modification). It is completely unclear where this missile could have come from, since nothing is known about the parts of the anti-aircraft defense in the North Ural region at that time. The land forces of the Armed Forces of the USSR had, in 1959, equipped with R-11M short-range missile systems with an 8K11 liquid rocket with a range of up to 180 km. Three missile brigades equipped with these weapons were deployed in the Carpathian, Kiev and Voronezh military districts, that is, the training starts of their calculations could not in any way lead to an accidental missile strike in the vicinity of Kholatchahl.

Among the supporters of the "rocket version," the notion that "fireballs" in the sky of the Northern Urals are born of optical effects accompanying the launching of long-range ballistic missiles is widespread. As you know, the Soviet Union since 1957 quite vigorously developed a program of both space rockets and the creation of intercontinental missiles for military purposes. The R-7 rocket has already been launched from Baikonur and although its launches have never been conducted in the northern direction, but only in the eastern direction (to Kamchatka), nevertheless, many researchers of the tragedy on the slope of the Holatchahl consider that the operating R-7 engines could be are seen from the Ottten area.
   In the opinion of the supporters of the "missile version" one of the most powerful - "unshieldable" - arguments in favor of the fact that between the launches of Balinese rockets from Baikonur and the events in the North. Ural has a certain connection, is the discovery of coincidence of the date of emergency launch of the R-7 missile with the observation of "fireballs" on March 31, 1959, by search engines. This coincidence has been found already mentioned repeatedly in this essay by Evgeny V. Buyanov, whose personal contribution to the popularization of the history of the Djatlov group and the analysis of the various information associated with it is difficult to overestimate. The discovery, to be sure, is interesting, just not leading anywhere, because coincidences are generally incapable of giving a correct clue.
   It is possible to prove mathematically that rocket launches from the Baikonur cosmodrome are not visible from the area of ​​the Djatlov Pass, regardless of the weather and the transparency of the atmosphere. Recall that due to the curvature of the Earth's surface, for the observer from the area of ​​North. Ural, the Baikonur cosmodrome will be located in the "invisibility zone", that is, below the horizon line. Determine what is the excess of the "scope" over Baikonur, in other words, how high the rocket must fly from the cosmodrome, so that its torch gets in the field of view of the observer from the area of ​​the Djatlov Pass. This is quite simple, knowing the exact geographical location of the launching points and the observed latitude distance between them is equal to 15 ° (in fact, this is not true, but both tolerances play into the hands of the rocket proponents, since they reduce the distance.

Finally it remains to say that we consider the "rocket" version to be the most untenable, the most nasty of all. At all desire to remain cold-blooded, to refrain from an emotional estimation it is impossible, as she - this version - smears black color of a vile slander and a plot the whole layer of the most worthy and fair people born in the USSR. First of all, our technical elite, an elite of a truly global scale, has provided a fantastic leap forward for all mankind in the field of aerospace technologies. This jump was made just then, in the second half of the 1950s, it was these people (who did not know that) not just protruding the road to space for humanity, but they formed a new type of thinking, that global "cosmism" that firmly entered our life and now is perceived everyday, and then it seemed something completely improbable. This version slanders the defenders of our Motherland, those same people whose uncompromising perception and conscientious fulfillment of official duty have provided our homeland more than half a century of peaceful life. To spit on idiots like Khrushchev, the Soviet Union is after all not only Khrushchev and the Marxist doctrinaire from the Central Committee, it's also ours with your parents and grandfathers!
   We now have the opportunity to pick on the Internet and talk about the tragedy of Igor Dyatlov's group simply because our fathers and grandfathers gave us this opportunity in the 1940s and 1950s. and did it very well. Those who are going to approach their assessment with their values, I want to say once and for all: do not judge for yourself about people!
   However, let's return to the analysis of technogenic-criminal versions. Fortunately, there are very few of them left.
   3) The death of Igor Dyatlov's group was the result of the attack of criminals who fled from the objects of Ivdelsky ITK. The version is much more reasonable than "about missiles and special forces", since it is possible to believe in appearance of criminals on the slope of Holatchahl rather than in the non-existent "spetsnaz groups" and missiles. However, this version comes into apparent contradiction with the recorded effect of the actual material: all the money and documents of the group remained untouched, alcohol was not captured, cameras and clocks were not kidnapped ... There is one more important detail: , then they would not let the girls go. It's not even about whether you can rape a girl at -20 ° C? The crooks would not let the girls out just to make fun of it, to poke around.

In addition, the criminals would not stand on ceremony in the choice of means of murder, which means that the corpses would have jaws broken, teeth broken and stab wounds would be necessary. Running from the "prison" a criminal can not be imagined without a knife. However, nothing similar, as we remember, forensic expert did not describe. The dead tourists were killed very carefully, as far as the epithet "accurately" applies to the concept of murder.
   On the basis of all these considerations, it is reasonable to doubt that the criminals could have been related to the death of Igor Dyatlov's group.
   4) The death of Igor Dyatlov's group was the result of an attack by illegal gold miners (as a version of version No. 3). This hypothesis is a modification of the previous one. Instead of "escaped prisoners" as assassins, "gold miners" who illegally poured gold in the Lozva Valley act as assassins. According to this version, the flooring found in the ravine belonged to the "gold miners", because the "woodpeckers" exhausted by the cold could not build it by their own efforts. The fishing of the "black gold miners" (still called "black artel workers") was absolutely illegal, and these people could well have decided to kill the persons who threatened them with splitting. It remains to add that the deported Chechens and Ingush played a large role in the illegal mining and turnover of gold in the territory of the USSR right up to perestroika, and the capacity of this rink in the mid-1980s played an important role. was estimated at 10 tons of gold per year. Even if you make an amendment to the fact that in the late 50's. scale was much more modest, and organized crime, strictly speaking, did not exist, still the seriousness of this phenomenon should not be underestimated.
   However, the version of the death of the group Dyatlov at the hands of "black diggers" also does not pass. In winter, it is impossible to wash gold even with an unfreezing stream, firstly, it is very cold to tinker with water, and secondly, the light-day is too short. In addition, we do not forget about the complexity of supplying such a group with everything necessary - traces of the ski "walker" from the nearest habitation would tell the local Mansi about uninvited guests. In general, in the wild in winter such a secret fishery is impossible. There are cases when, in winter, the "black artel workers" equipped their "caches" near the mine dumps of gold mines and sifted them under the very nose of the guards (and possibly with her knowledge). This is a completely different kind of activity and to our case it has not the slightest relation.

In addition, the "artel", killing tourists, clearly would not have denied themselves to profit from the property of the victims. Why should they be embarrassed - they already earned a "tower", the accusation of robbery would not have aggravated their situation in the event of arrest. However, we do not see this. Again, the argument remains on the nature of the injuries that should have been caused to the deceased - there are no stab wounds, no obvious marks of beatings.
   5) The death of Igor Dyatlov's group was the result of the fall of a hanging piece (gondola) of an uncontrolled American balloon onto a tent. The version is, to put it mildly, very strange and comparable in probability, say, with the meteorite falling into the tent of "dyatlovtsev". This hypothesis owes its birth to the fact that American intelligence for many years launched uncontrolled aerostats with photographic equipment in the direction of the Soviet territory. Sometimes they fell, or they were knocked down, such, for example, happened on November 16, 1959 near Volgograd. Then, an anti-aircraft balloon was destroyed by an anti-aircraft missile of the S-75 air defense complex at an altitude of 20 km, fragments of which were presented to the world community.
   According to this version, the gondola of the balloon, which lost height due to damage to the shell, "drove" along the far entrance of the tent part, leaving no recognizable traces on the snow and seriously injuring Dubinina, Zolotarev and Thibault Brignoles. The last one was sleeping on a camera and ... familiar, is not it? Then followed the race on the slope of students, frightened by an unknown object, insidiously fallen from the sky directly to the tent ... unsuccessful struggle for life ... freezing.
   This version initially looks very naive, if only because the authors of it elementary do not imagine the object they are trying to fantasize about. In order to clarify the issue under discussion, it makes sense to go deeper into historical and technical details, which, although not directly related to the circumstances of the death of Igor Dyatlov's group, are still interesting in themselves. In addition, there is practically no reliable information on the American reconnaissance balloons on the Internet, so we hope that this excursion will be doubly interesting.
   Beginning in 1953, representatives of the American intelligence community were rushing about with the idea of ​​launching automatic balloons in the photo equipment on board in the direction of the USSR. By that time meteorologists already knew that huge masses of air at high altitudes make the way from the Mediterranean to the Sea of ​​Okhotsk and the balloon launched in Turkey can theoretically fly to the Pacific Ocean. It is only necessary that he keep in the right air echelon (at an altitude of about 20 km or above). The perennial boiling of American engineering thought resulted in the project "Genetrix", within the framework of which controlled automatic balloons designed to carry out meteorological observations were actually developed, and in fact - to photograph the Earth's surface.
   They were real mastodons. The volume of the actual balloon, which provided the lift, was designed to pump 1,600 cubic meters. meters of helium. Two rockers (very similar to those used to carry water in the villages - and this is not a joke, they are really wooden and really similar!) Were attached to the balloon, on the opposite ends of which were hung a basket woven from a vine and a foam block with photo and radio equipment equipment. In the wicker basket, some of the instruments were installed, and ballast was suspended, which could be dropped in flight.

The program of photographing the deep regions of the USSR by automatic controlled balloons continued until 1964. For 8 years, Americans have launched about 12,000 such devices. Some of the "researchers" of the tragedy of Igor Dyatlov's group admit that one of them collapsed on the evening of February 1, 1959, on the tent of tourists.
   Objections to this version of events in general are the same as for the "rolling bomb" and the avalanche (it is impossible to transport the wounded on the slope, etc.), but there are a couple of specific arguments. The fact is that the balloon, losing height, could not after the impact of the gondola on the ground soar up and disappear in the sky. He certainly had to fall somewhere very near. However, the search engines did not find it, although they searched the neighborhood of Kholat-Sahyl in the most conscientious way. To explain the absence of an aerostat, it is necessary to introduce into the plot purposeful actions of a mysterious "spetsnaz" who managed to take out the object dropped from the sky before the search engines appeared. But as it was shown above, no special mobile special forces capable of moving to the Ottoten area, to conduct a search operation there and take out a mysterious cargo, simply did not exist in the USSR. In addition, it is completely incomprehensible why the Soviet authorities would need to mask the fact of the death of Soviet citizens through the fault of American reconnaissance equipment. On the contrary, such a fact should be made public and maximally "raspiarit" - this would be an excellent trump card in the ideological confrontation.
   Another serious argument against the version of the "balloon-killer" is the assumption of a hasty retreat of tourists from the tent down the slope after the gondola fell on them from above. Such fearfulness seems highly unreliable - all participants of the campaign knew perfectly well what an aerostat was, which at that time was not at all such an exotic item as it is now. Even if you take it for granted that the fall of the gondola caused a severe injury to the three members of the group, it's impossible to understand why the rest of them left the tent without taking warm things away. Of course, the gondola, uncontrollably dragging along the ground, posed a certain threat, but not so fatal and irresistible as to escape from it without knowing where without shoes, mittens and hats. On the contrary, it made sense to observe the movement of a dangerous object, remaining in place and only after its disappearance to proceed to any active action.
   In general, the version of the "falling balloon" should be regarded as extremely absurd, naive, internally contradictory, without any factual basis. There is nothing to talk about.
   On this, the analysis of existing versions should be stopped, since enough is written. We have to state that the explanations of the events that took place at the moment of the Dyatlov Pass in February 1959 look contrived, contradictory and unconvincing.