Recent Posts

1

General Discussion / Re: Last two days of the Dyatlov group: 5. Fatal afternoon for Rustem and Zinaida

« Last post by Arjan on Today at 11:44:35 AM »

Dear Kathleen,

Thank you for your view/reply on/to this post.

Several photos made from the films - found by both search parties - pose more questions than answers.

In my opinion, these last two photos from the group pose more questions than answers.

Several years ago, I have counted the number of skis and ski poles, but every time I had noted that a few too many skis are visible without bindings.
As far as I know, on all other photos, the skis are visible with bindings.

An example of two other photos that pose similar questions.

Photo from Thibo's camera:



Loose photo:



It looks like both photos had been taken within a few seconds.
The photo from Thibo's camera had very probably taken by Zinaida.

On the loose photo, Lyudmila is not visible.
If I remember well, I have read that Lyudmila had been a competent amateur photographer.
Personally I take into account that she may well had taken the photographer of this loose photo in question.

2

General Discussion / Re: Is there evidence for outsiders?

« Last post by Arjan on Today at 11:20:16 AM »

Personally I don't rely on the photos (made from the films found by the two search parties) as sound evidence for events during the tour.
Several of these photos pose more questions than answers.

If I am not mistaken, on loose photo no 6. a long ski - around 2 meters long - is visible.



As far as I am aware, only Yuri Yudin had used this long size of skis.

I am aware that at least several documents state that Yuri Yudin had left the tour at 2nd settlement.

My point is:
- How is is possible that one long ski is visible on this photo, while Yuri Yudin had already left the tour?
- Had Yuri Yudin stayed the fatal night for 7 group members together with Zinaida and Rustem in the re-erected tent on one ski pole and left the next morning to alert the authorities? Three persons lying together under several blankets in the tent had easily survived that night, and Yuri Yudin had well been able to return to 2nd settlement the next morning.

This photo is of course no sound proof, that he - or another person - had stayed longer on the tour than several documents state.

3

General Discussion / Re: AVANLANCHE THEORY

« Last post by Partorg on Today at 07:01:04 AM »

There is no way that the objects found can provide evidence of the location of the tent

The artifacts were not found “anywhere,” but in the coordinates of the Tent’s location, obtained using the serif method. I have outlined the chain of reasoning and the grounds why they can be considered confirmation of the Place. But since you think that “there’s no way they can”, it means they definitely can’t and the question can be considered settled.
Увы мне, болезному. 

My understanding of 1079's native name is more along the lines of the barren slope where nothing goes or grows there

Yes, I once thought so too. Many people think so.  But T. Slinkina in her work “Mansi oronyms of the Urals” clearly defines oronym «Kholat Syakhl» not as Dead Mountain, but as Mountain of the Dead.  Slinkina is not only a candidate of philological sciences - she is also Mansi by nationality and Mansi is her native language. I think there is no reason not to trust her. In terms of language, at least.

4

General Discussion / Re: AVANLANCHE THEORY

« Last post by Partorg on Today at 06:48:08 AM »

delete.

5

General Discussion / Re: AVANLANCHE THEORY

« Last post by Олег Таймень on April 18, 2024, 09:02:45 PM »

First, the actual location of the tent is a mattter of dispute

The location of the tent was established with an accuracy of ±5 meters in 2013 by detecting some small objects that in 1959 could have been lost in the immediate vicinity of tent.

There is no way that the objects found can provide evidence of the location of the tent. Firstly, it is not known whose objects these are. There are different opinions on this matter. Secondly, numerous search engines could disassemble ski poles anywhere on the slope. Or in several places.

6

General Discussion / Is there evidence for outsiders?

« Last post by Ziljoe on April 18, 2024, 03:39:53 PM »

In the nature of fair and equal debate.

Where is the evidence for outsiders?. Physical evidence of outsiders at the location and / or documentation or statements of outsiders?.

Please let's gather the evidence as a community.

7

General Discussion / Re: AVANLANCHE THEORY

« Last post by GlennM on April 18, 2024, 01:06:23 PM »

Partog, thank you.  Your analysis suggests there is are areas at the top and base of the leeward slope where turbulent air facilitates the deposition of snow. Once resolved a laminar flow of air and particulate flow unimpeded in the mid section. In addition,  I've seen wind scour away sand at the base of a wind shelter. So, buildup and tear down of wind driven material is the rule, not the exception. This certainly reinforces the idea that turbulence caused by the tent would serve to increase the height of a snowbank windward of the tent. Appreciated.

My understanding of 1079's native name is more along the lines of the barren slope where nothing goes or grows there.

8

General Discussion / Re: AVANLANCHE THEORY

« Last post by Partorg on April 17, 2024, 07:51:52 AM »

Snow on leeward slopes is unevenly distributed. On the upper third of the slope, the wind flow saturated with snow, turbulized by the flow around the ridge, deposits a certain amount of snow and a small accumulation occurs there. If the lee slope is steeper than ~30°, cornices may form on the ridge. If the bend is smaller, cornices do not form and the snow accumulation looks like a gentle hill. In the middle third of the slope, the wind flow is laminar and the snow almost does not linger there, and in the lower third, precipitation begins again, reaching a maximum at the bottom of the valley. It is precisely this classic layout that we see on the slope of the NE spur. 1079
The tent was located on the border of the upper and middle thirds of the slope, and snow was periodically accumulated and removed there.
In the middle third of the slope all the snow is mostly carried away, so it remained there in the form of footprints-columns cleared from the surrounding snow.
In the lower third, the footprints were simply covered in snowstorms.

As for the name of the mountain. If you trust Slinkina’s dictionary, the word: “kho'olat” translated from Mansi means “dead people.” Moreover, the dead are very ancient, mummified, mossy, almost petrified. At the top of 1079 there are several low, horizontally elongated flat rock-remains, which may well be associated in the imagination with some ancient Mansi burials.
But this is my purely subjective opinion, which I do not hope to impose on anyone )).

9

General Discussion / Re: AVANLANCHE THEORY

« Last post by GlennM on April 17, 2024, 05:23:15 AM »

We must also consider those footprints again. Did they lead from the tent all the way to the woods? No, why not? They were obscured owing to a mass movement of snow. It seems clear that slides, slips, slumps and even avalanches occur on the slope of 1079. The right combination of angle, densities, wind and barren landscape make it a reality. Them Mansi knew this, hence the name of 1079.

10

General Discussion / Re: AVANLANCHE THEORY

« Last post by Partorg on April 17, 2024, 04:13:49 AM »

относительно точности. Даже весьма приблизительный расчет технической погрешности при такого рода «измерениях» на месте дает погрешность +/- 10...12 м.

Я имел ввиду не координаты полученные с помощью засечек и разного рода фотопривязок, а место где КАН нашел шплинты от колец лыжных палок. А они могли быть брошены только там где кольца с палок снимали. Вот эти снятые кольца и видны на фото с только что разобранной и перетащенной на пару метров вверх палаткой.
Подсвечник, проволока, булавки, и что там ещё, были найдены там же (если я ничего не путаю), а  стало быть о дальнейших путях следования палатки говорить не имеет смысла.

лавины (неважно, что это — «доска» или свежий снег) никогда не «руководствуются» только одним параметром.

Разумеется. Я так и написал: «при определённых погодных условиях»  Если, например,  тёплый западный ветер «как при взлёте самолёта» вечера 31/01, к ночи ослабел до каких нибудь 2 - 4 м/с  и оставаясь при этом относительно тёплым (≥10°С > t° снежного покрова) омывал склон в течении нескольких часов, то склон вполне мог покрыться слоем поверхностной изморози которая и послужила «слабым слоем» для выпавшего днём из общей метели смеси свежего (атмосферного) и метелевого (перенесённого) снега.
Доски (snow slab) в этом случае конечно не было, был слаф, но и его могло хватить чтобы на первом этапе вогнать их в панику и заставить разрезать палатку  чтобы выбраться из под него, а потом заставить уйти в лес чтобы дождаться там когда ветер на склоне утихнет и можно будет вернуться к раскопкам.
Такая же ночь могла там случиться двумя – тремя неделями раньше и тогда поверхностная изморозь, накрытая сверху принесенным и слежавшимся снегом, стала бы «поверхностной погребённой», с теми же функциями «слабого слоя» для лежащей на ней ветровой доски толщиной 15 - 20 см.
Естественно, такая погодная комбинация складывается там не раз в неделю. Скорее всего даже не каждый год и надо строить зимовку на этом чертовом склоне чтобы хоть в чём нибудь убедиться.
Но IMHO, оба варианта достаточно правдоподобны и в отличии от всех прочих не умножают сущностей, ибо опираются на то что там реально имеется – снег и склон. Старик Оккам может спать спокойно.


                                         *****************

regarding accuracy. Even a very approximate calculation of the technical error in this kind of "measurements" on the spot, gives an error of +/- 10...12 m.

I did not mean the coordinates obtained using serifs and various kinds of photo references, but the place where KAN found the cotter pins from the rings of ski poles. And they could only be thrown where the rings were removed from the sticks. These removed rings are visible in the photo with the tent just dismantled and dragged a couple of meters. The candlestick, wire, and pins were found in the same place (if I’m not confusing anything), and therefore there is no point in talking about further routes of the tent

avalanches (no matter what it is - "board" or fresh snow) are never "guided" by only one parameter.

Of course. That’s what I wrote: «under certain weather conditions» If, for example, a warm westerly wind «like when an airplane takes off» on the evening of 31/01, by nightfall weakened to some 2 - 4 m/s and, while remaining warm, washed the slope for several hours, then the slope could well be covered with a layer of surface frost, which served as a weak layer for the mixture of fresh (atmospheric) snow and transported blizzard snow that fell during the day from the general snowstorm.
In this case, of course, there was no snow slab, there was a slaf, but it could have been enough to drive them into panic at the first stage and force them to cut the tent to get out, and then force them to go into the forest to wait there until the wind on the slope subsides and it will be possible to return to the excavations.

The same night could have happened there two to three weeks earlier, and then the surface frost, covered on top with brought and compacted of vind snow, would have become «surface buried» with the same functions of a “weak layer” for lying on it the wind slab 15 - 20 cm. thickness
Naturally, such a weather combination occurs there more than once a week. Most likely, not even every year, and you need to build a winter hut on this damn slope to at least be convinced of anything.

IMHO, both options are quite plausible and, unlike all the others, they do not multiply entities, because they rely on what actually exists in fact - snow and slope. Old man Occam can sleep peacefully.