I. Climbing category — high-altitude 2. Climbing area — Pamir, Peter I Ridge 3. Peak — Peak Moskva (6785 m) via the NE wall from Fortambek Glacier 4. Proposed difficulty category — 6B 5. Route characteristics:

height difference — 2835 m, section lengths: III cat. diff. — 160 m, IV cat. diff. — 700 m, V–VI cat. diff. — 3515 m, including wall sections (excluding the pre-summit ridge) — 2615 m, average steepness — 75° (wall section)

6. Pitons driven:

for belaying, for creating artificial anchors: rock — 175, 15; ice — 101, 24; bolt — 3, 3

7. Total climbing hours — 143
8. Number of bivouacs and their characteristics: twelve bivouacs, including one sitting and four semi-sitting due to limited platform sizes.
9. Team members:

Cherevko Vladimir Leonidovich, Master of Sports of the USSR — team leader Alekseyuk Mikhail Mironovich, Master of Sports of the USSR Yakovina Viktor Antonovich, Master of Sports of the USSR Galas Fedor Stepanovich, Candidate for Master of Sports Palamarchuk Valery Nikolaevich, Candidate for Master of Sports Podgorsky Vasily Mikhailovich, Candidate for Master of Sports

10. Team coach: Honored Coach of the Ukrainian SSR, Master of Sports of the USSR Polevoy G.V.
11. Departure on the route: July 28, 1977, return: August 14, 1977

III. Preparation for the ascent, organizational and tactical plans.

Our team's close acquaintance with the northeast wall of Peak Moskva began in 1976, when team members participated in the ascent of Peak Kommunizma and Peak E. Korzhenevskaya as part of the Ukrainian Trade Unions Council expedition.

In December 1976, the Ukrainian SSR Alpine Federation board meeting discussed the participation of the Ukrainian SSR Sports Committee teams in the USSR Alpine Championship and designated the route to Peak Moskva from Fortambek Glacier as the object in the high-altitude class. When assembling the team for Peak Moskva, the Ukrainian "Spartak" alpine club collective was chosen as the base due to their experience with high-altitude and technical ascents and multiple successes in these classes at the USSR Championship (1964 — Peak Engels, 1st place; 1966 — Peak OGPU, 1st place; 1967 — Peak Kommunizma from the north, 1st place; 1969 — Peak Sv. Korei, 2nd place; 1973 — Peak Kommunizma via the SE wall, A. Kustovsky's route).

The team members entered for the USSR Championship had between one and four ascents to seven-thousanders, except for V. Yakovina, for whom the highest previous ascent was Peak Engels. Throughout the winter period, regular general physical training was conducted. In January 1977, a ski training camp was held in the Carpathians, and in March, a rock climbing camp near Zhitomir. In July 1977, intensive work was done on preparing equipment and supplies. Particular attention was paid to creating down clothing capable of protecting participants in any weather conditions. For this purpose, a lightweight special fabric with a synthetic base and a sprayed rubber layer was developed at the Kiev Research Institute of Fabrics. Suits made from this fabric weighed no more than 1.8 kg, remained elastic at temperatures down to -40 °C, and were waterproof under rain.

The organizational plan for the ascent included:

1. A training camp for all participants near the Yaghnob wall from June 27 to July 14.
2. Relocating the expedition by helicopter from the Yaghnob area to Sulaev clearing from July 15 to 18.
3. A helicopter reconnaissance of the wall from July 18 to 25.
4. Acclimatization exits and processing of the lower wall section from July 20 to 25.
5. Ascent to Peak Moskva.
6. Descent from the summit via the simplest path to the south onto the Gan-do Glacier, transition to the Gar-mo Glacier, and return to the base camp by helicopter.

The organizational plan was fully executed. Preliminary processing of the lower route section by a group on July 20–21 allowed for clarification of the ascent route and lifting the main portion of supplies and equipment to a height of around 5000 m. The helicopter reconnaissance enabled:

• clarification of route details;
• taking photographs of the most interesting sections.

The tactical plan was developed based on the chosen route.

The northeast wall of Peak Moskva is a nearly five-kilometer section of the Peter I Ridge, starting at a height slightly below Sulaev clearing and lacking significant depressions in the ridge connecting the western, main, and eastern peaks.

The lower wall section consists of steep rocks with a "sheep's forehead" structure and few handholds.

The central part is an area of hanging glaciers, snow-ice slopes, and ice walls. The upper level of this section reaches heights of around 6000 m.

The most complex part of the wall is located above 6000 m and consists of steep rocks with significant ice accretion.

The entire wall is overhung by massive cornices on the summit ridge.

Development of the chosen plan began with selecting the ascent route. Two possible paths to the summit are visible from below. In the lower part, to the left and right of the main peak, there are small ridges leading to the snow-ice slopes of the central section. It was assumed that these ridges could ensure safe passage of the lower wall section in case of ice avalanches from the hanging glaciers in the central section.

The left ridge is more gradual. The right, steeper ridge was attempted by a group of Polish climbers in 1976, who reached a level of around 4500–4600 m before descending.

The final route choice was made after:

• consultations;
• reviewing reports;
• analyzing data from a meteorological group (led by V.G. Freifeld) working at Sulaev clearing since 1975.

According to the materials obtained, out of 30 ice avalanches and avalanches that occurred on the slopes of Peak Moskva between June 20 and July 20, 1977, only two passed through the area of the right variant without affecting any of its sections. The highest frequency of ice avalanches was observed in the center of the wall and in the area of the left variant.

A similar pattern was recorded by meteorologists in 1975 (a report on this work was submitted by V.G. Freifeld to the USSR Sports Committee).

Notably, during observations, no significant avalanches were recorded in the upper part of the wall in the area of either the left or right variants.

Based on the materials obtained, the right variant for traversing the NE wall of Peak Moskva was chosen, and the following tactical plan was developed:

1. To shorten the time required to traverse the most hazardous lower wall section, conduct preliminary processing of this section and transport loads and equipment to the maximum height.

2. Traverse the lower wall section vertically upwards at maximum speed, avoiding a rightward deviation as planned by the Polish climbers. This slightly complicates the route but increases safety.

3. Upon reaching a height of 6000 m, process the most complex pre-summit wall, ensuring at least 300 m of main rope is available.

4. Conduct the ascent with seven bivouacs on the route.

5. Given that after traversing the lower wall section, descending in case of worsening weather is highly undesirable due to increased danger with fresh snow, maintain sufficient reserves of supplies, equipment, and fuel for reaching the ridge.

The tactical plan was largely executed. The team followed the planned route upon departure. Adjustments were made only due to bad weather, which persisted continuously from August 3 to 7, 1977, during the ascent of the most complex upper wall section. As a result, three planned bivouacs on the pre-summit wall and ridge turned into six.

Additionally, in the middle section of the route, two 20–40-meter ice walls were encountered, crossing the entire slope, requiring the use of artificial anchors for passage. These walls were visible from below even with 60x magnification. An additional bivouac was necessary here compared to the plan.

Preventive and rescue measures were ensured by the expedition based at Sulaev clearing, which maintained stable radio communication with Dzhirgatal. Communication between the wall and base was facilitated by radio stations.

V. Route description by days.

July 28. We depart from the bivouac under the wall at 5:00. The upper part of the wall is barely lit. The route begins on a previously processed section, where almost all equipment and supplies are stored. Therefore, traveling light, we ascend relatively quickly. Crampons hold well. By 10:00, we reach the storage site, having gained at least 500–600 m in height, and approach complex rocks resembling "sheep's foreheads" (section R2–R3).

The rocks are smoothed, with few handholds. We start ascending directly upwards towards a snow-ice ridge (section R3–R4), which protects us from possible ice avalanches on either side of the chosen path. The rocks are challenging. Using ladders and artificial anchors, we overcome three 40-meter walls. Rucksacks are pulled up. We work until late evening, striving to ascend as high as possible and avoid the overhanging glaciers in the middle wall section.

At 22:00, we stop for a bivouac. Suitable platforms for overnight stays are unavailable. We settle in two tents in a semi-sitting position, creating small platforms from stones and snow.

July 29. A light snowfall occurred during the night. The pair Palamarchuk — Cherevko begins processing the snow-ice ridge at 8:00. Tubular ice pitons are light and easily penetrate the ice. By midday, we reach a rock ridge in a safe location via a sheer wall, where it's convenient to set up a bivouac (point R5). Rucksacks are pulled up to this point, and under the protection of overhanging rocks, two platforms for tents are constructed from stones.

The pair Cherevko — Palamarchuk processes another approximately 150 m of the path along the rock ridge and reaches the foot of an ice wall, which needs to be ascended to reach the snow-ice fields in the middle route section.

Bivouac at 20:00. Radio communication with the base camp works well. We connect four times a day, receiving all information from below about our direction. We also constantly use radio communication within the group. One radio station is always with the leading pair, and the second is with the "rear."

July 30. We depart early. At 6:00, we ascend, and by 7:00, we're all moving along the route processed yesterday (R5–R6). By 9:00, we're at the ice wall (R5–R7). According to the meteorological group's data (led by V.G. Freifeld), ice avalanches are most likely between 10 and 11 am. Today, it's cloudy, which is likely beneficial. The wall (R5–R7) is traversed relatively easily, although a ladder is used. Climbing irons are very helpful. Those who mastered the ascent technique on two irons with a rucksack secured to the belt during the Yaghnob training camp manage the steepest sections without pulling up their rucksacks.

The weather deteriorates, but this is not particularly worrisome since we're now on relatively calm snow-ice slopes in the middle wall section. We stop for a bivouac at 20:00. The altitude reading is 5200 m.

July 31. We begin moving from the tent along a relatively simple snow slope. There's a lot of fresh snow, so the lead changes every 80–100 m. By 14:00, we approach a rather steep ice wall with remnants of snow in the form of "kalgshpors" on nearly vertical sections. Using ice pitons, the pair Cherevko — Alekseyuk ascends the wall under a large serac, where a tent can be placed.

Next, we need to overcome a 20-meter sheer wall on the serac (section R10–R11). To avoid overhanging sections, we first move left-up, then right-up. By 20:30, this ice ledge is processed. We descend to a tent established at the foot of the ledge at point R9.

August 1. We depart relatively early. After traversing the previously processed section (R10–R11), we move along a snow-ice slope. The altitude is significant, and the snow is loose and deep. The slope is steep. By 14:00, we approach a 40–50-meter ice ledge (section R12–R13). Attempts to find a detour to the left or right are unsuccessful. We have to face the obstacle head-on. Ladders and pitons are used. By 19:00, the pair Galas — Palamarchuk reaches the top of the ledge, and eventually, all group members are there.

Neither section R10–R11 nor R12–R13 appeared as challenging from below. Traversing them took a considerable amount of time, and we're behind schedule by a day.

August 2. We move along a challenging snow-ice slope (thin layer of snow on ice) towards the bergschrund at the base of the pre-summit wall — a key section of the route. We choose a relatively safe location and set up a tent. There's still plenty of time before evening. The pair Cherevko — Palamarchuk departs for processing. On this day, we manage to traverse the bergschrund and hang three ropes above it to the rocks (sections R14–R15 and R15–R16). By 20:30, we return to the tent.

August 3. At 5:30, we're all on the route. Movement on crampons across the ice and ascent to the rocks via the processed path (R14–R16) occurs relatively quickly. By midday, the weather starts to deteriorate noticeably. This is unfortunate, as we're currently traversing one of the most complex sections (R16–R17). It's snowing. There's no suitable platform for a bivouac. At 21:30, in near-total darkness, we settle for a sitting bivouac in different locations.

August 4. Snow continued throughout the night and is still falling. We stretch our stiff limbs and begin slow movement to the right and upwards. By 14:00, the pair Cherevko — Yakovina traverses two ropes. At this location, by cutting out several cubic meters of ice, we can establish a tent. By 16:00, five team members are at this point. Dense snow is falling continuously. By the end of the day, the pair manages to process another approximately 100 m of the route and descend to a bivouac at point R18, where a tent is set up on a small platform.

August 5. The weather is very poor. Nevertheless, we depart on the route at 12:00. On this day, despite continuous snowfall, we traverse the previously processed section (R18–R19) and another 100 m of alternating steep rocks and ice (section R19–R20). We bivouac on a snow-ice cushion, for which we had to cut out at least 3–4 m³ of snow and ice.

August 6. It's the fourth day of bad weather. We don't dismantle the tent and continue processing the path. The pair Cherevko — Palamarchuk traversed a total of three ropes of rock slabs with ice from 10:00 to 20:00 and descended back to point R20 for a bivouac. We plan to depart as a group tomorrow, regardless of the weather. Down jackets with a special frost-resistant rubber coating on the fabric withstand the weather exceptionally well: after a full day of work in the snow, we remain dry.

August 7. We depart at 9:00. The weather has improved slightly, but it's extremely cold. Ropes and rocks are covered in snow. We traverse the processed section (R20–R21) using climbing irons. By the snow flags and increasing wind, we sense the proximity of the ridge. After overcoming several rock walls and ice slopes, at 20:00, the pair Cherevko — Galas reaches the pre-summit ridge of Peak Moskva. Within 1.5–2 hours, the entire team ascends to the ridge. We bivouac on a platform carved into the ice.

August 8. We move along the pre-summit ridge. We bypass the western peak. There's a strong wind and frost. A lot of fresh snow. We carefully navigate around heavily laden cornices. We bivouac on a good, wind-protected platform on the main peak. For the first time during the ascent, we manage to properly stretch the tent.

August 9. Along the ridge with cornices, through deep fresh loose snow, we reach the main peak of Peak Moskva by 14:00. We retrieve a note left by a Georgian Alpine Club group that ascended to the summit exactly a year ago — August 9, 1976. Leaving our own note in a cairn, we begin descending to the saddle towards Peak Borodino. In the following days, the group descended via I. Bogachev's path to the Gan-do Glacier and further through the Avo-Dara pass to the Berezovaya Grove, from where they were transported by helicopter to Dzhirgatal on August 15.

VI. Table of main route characteristics

Profile of the NE wall of Peak Moskva. Photo from a helicopter

Ice slopes on section R1–R2

Rock wall on section R2–R3

Exit to the ice wall on section R6–R7

Ice wall on section R10–R11