Theories Discussion > General Discussion

Tent dimensions

<< < (3/3)

Osi:
On a deserted and treeless slope; How would you feel if an apple hit your tent in the dark? This situation is more than a stress that can be overcome with the control of a few people. It results in a mass exodus to understand the situation. The group encountered more. A force equivalent to hundreds of crates of apples was dragged onto their tent, and in the midst of their joyous gathering, the icy tent collapsed. The tent was not buried under the snow. A pole broke. They were stunned, as if they had been punched by a champion boxer. If they needed to be taken out of the tent (kgb, mansi), they would go out by opening the buttons. A flashlight above the tent and on the path was unforgettable. The young people would definitely resist there and would not enter the forest. Instead of orderly traces, there would be traces of chaos. I watched hundreds of videos about Kholat visits. Everyone looks at the forest from the tent and spends time on the monumental rock. Considering the snow movement, which is one of the most important versions of this tragedy, cameras are never turned towards the Kholat summit. I asked many tourists vacationing in Turkey about this tragedy. Many people think this is due to the government and see this as a good reason not to look at the top.

GlennM:
Much earlier in my participation in the forum, I thought it might be soviet jets doing night time training flights. Whether they dropped flares or dumb bombs it would be enough reason for the hikers to " bug out" of their tent and get away. However, nobody has turned up records pertaining to Soviet military flights on the night in question. I have since dismissed the idea in favor of a natural cause. Igor was warned by the forester about the conditions on the slope. They went anyway. Bad things happen to good people, unfortunately.

GlennM:


Regarding this image. When the tent was initially discovered, an ice pick was used to make a tear in the tent in order for Slobtsov to look inside. Why? The diagram shows the tent was pretty well savaged. It is canon that the hikers cut their way out. Something is very wrong here. Large tears in the tent would allow easy access for inspection. Those same tears would result in a snow pile within the tent. This would to be excavated in order to find bodies. The written record shows nothing of the sort happened. If the snow under the flashlight on the tent is any indication, snow did fall after the tent was emptied.

Is a possible explanation that the large tears in the tent happened after the hikers left? Was the tent torn into by the recovery team? Was the tent torn when it was packed for transport?

For me, if I were discovering the tent, I would 1. Call out. 2. Enter by the front flap 3. Cut my way in. But, if thentent was already ruined, I would just look inside.

Add to this that both Zina and Zolo mended the tent. Add to this that two were already outside of tent ( better dressd) when they left for the woods.
If those two dug toward the side of the tent while others cut from inside, a snow slide makes sense.

Arjan:
Personally I take into account that the tent had been fully frozen found by the first search party. This may well have resulted that the opening of the tent had to be defrosted from the ice between both tent canvasses at the opening. It is quite logic that a member of the search party had torn the tent canvas to get a quick access to the inside of the tent.

I remember that one author about this case has stated that the shorter cuts on the eye level had been made to have a view from the inside to the tent to the cedar/ravine area.

If this statement is correct, then there are five details found by the first search party that hint on a communication channel between the tent and the cedar/ravine area:
1. The shorter cuts on the eye level;
2. The flash light on top of the tent for sending morse code to the cedar/ravine area, or intending to indicate the direction to the tent for group members returning from cedar/ravine area;
3. The flash light - switched on - found in the middle between the tent and the cedar/ravine area, intended as beacon halfway for group members returning from cedar/ravine area;
4. Yuri Dor and/or Yuri Kri climbing the cedar to have a direct view from an opening between the branches in the cedar in the direction to the tent area. (The same author had stated this detail)
5. The smoke from campfire near the cedar. Remark: smoke from a campfire can be smelled over a long distance with a tiny wind.   

GlennM:
This interesting train of thought may suppose that there was sufficient reason to break up the hiking party into groups. It suggests that footprints were an insufficient guide back to the tent. It supposes that the duration of the flashlight(s) batteries would be adequate for the task at hand. Further, a flashlight switched on upon the ground could be seen at a distance, obviously at night. It argues that climbing the cedar in icy conditions was worth the risk. To climb the cedar and spot the flashlight might mean the actual tent was too far or cloaked in a foggy mist. It raises the question, "what was worth the trek to the woods and back?"  It explains the having of cuts on the tent for viewing the distant woods. Since this was the case, then it must have been too inclement for those within the tent to do their visual search outside and free standing. One would presume these viewing cuts preceeded the slashes to the tent. It makes clear that once the tent was catastrophically ruined by cutting, no mending of the tent would be sufficient to continue to use it. In other words, it was too cold to go out of the tent to look for the two Yuris, but it was acceptable to knife the tent to go find them. So, why did Igor try to get back to the tent?

It seems that in this case, two Yuris leave the tent and retrieve nothing of importance. They start a fire, but abandon it in order to climb a tree instead of following their own tracks back to the tent. The rest of the party shred and depart the tent to go find their friends who are by then dead. The remaining hikers strip the deceased of clothing and try to shelter in a ravine. Three hikers have sufficient reason to regain the tent. All perish.

Surely, everyone was of sound mind, or were they? 

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version