January 22, 2022, 06:17:24 PM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: Gravity Wind  (Read 7453 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

December 13, 2019, 01:25:49 PM
Reply #30
Offline

jarrfan


Regarding gravity wind theory: I can only comment that whatever took place, happened first at the tent site where they left. The 2 Yuri's died at the cedar tree area. The ravine 4 had enough time to dig out a den, then did not use it. Their injuries testify that they were injured at the site of death. There is no way they could have made the den, walked down that slope in the condition they were in. So there were basically 3 different death sites. I can only imagine they were separated, the ones at the cedar were questioned and tortured and then they moved onto the ravine 4 who were building a den in  hopes of being safe and whatever the threat was would go away. It  didn't.
 

December 14, 2019, 01:51:45 PM
Reply #31
Offline

MDGross


I'm among those who believe the tragedy was caused by a natural phenomenon. Perhaps a ferocious wind blew down the mountain slope. The tent started flapping wildly; the noise was deafening. When they rushed out of the tent in pitch blackness, the wind was howling and snow blowing from every direction. They had split seconds to make a decision in unimaginable weather conditions. In such a wind and at 30 below, they were already freezing to death when they reached the trees. The two under the tree died within half an hour or so. The three struggling to return to the tent died soon after. The last four tried frantically to dig out a snow den, but fell 9 or 10 feet onto rocks in the ravine and three out of the four suffered fatal injuries. All speculation on my part and I'm open to other theories. For now, this is the one I favor.
 

December 15, 2019, 11:37:46 PM
Reply #32
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Chemical, electrical burns?
If you follow the "rocket fuel narrative" then Yuri D was drenched in the stuff, covering his clothing (orange powder) and inhaling enough to give him a pulmonary edema. So this calls into question the "frostbite" which was atypical compared to the others.
Obviously the electrical narrative has good scope for blackened extremities.
Regards.

Nigel, it doesn’t seem to credible to me that Doroshenko could have been exposed to and especially not drenched ok, drenched is too strong, a swirling vapour perhaps. in rocket fuel ( I presume you refer to fuming nitric acid?), no it could be amines. such that it only caused severe damage to his extremities.  Like Zina's face? Fuming nitric acid would not only leave orange staining on his clothes it would likely disintegrate them. His relative reported that the clothing was disintegrating Fuming nitric has a tendency to degrade and oxidise any organic material and can cause it to burst into flames.  A good explanation for Yuri K's leg?

The explanation of frost bite is much more likely. Given that Yuri D clearly died before the others and yet he has far worse "frostbite" combined with Zina's face, Yuri D's clothing, Yuri D's foam on cheek, Yuri K's leg then i'd give it as 50/50 it was frostbite and not something else.
I think you would need to explain how his extremities were burned but the rest of his body wasn’t? Swirling vapour with large variation in density creating localised effects perhaps. For the electrical narrative it's easy.

Regards

Star man

Hi Nigel.  I would still expect more widespread chemical burns across the group.  Given the conditions frost bite is still the most likely reason.  It doesn’t rule out chemical vapour at toxic levels though.

Regards

Star man
 

December 16, 2019, 03:47:46 AM
Reply #33
Offline

Nigel Evans


Chemical, electrical burns?
If you follow the "rocket fuel narrative" then Yuri D was drenched in the stuff, covering his clothing (orange powder) and inhaling enough to give him a pulmonary edema. So this calls into question the "frostbite" which was atypical compared to the others.
Obviously the electrical narrative has good scope for blackened extremities.
Regards.

Nigel, it doesn’t seem to credible to me that Doroshenko could have been exposed to and especially not drenched ok, drenched is too strong, a swirling vapour perhaps. in rocket fuel ( I presume you refer to fuming nitric acid?), no it could be amines. such that it only caused severe damage to his extremities.  Like Zina's face? Fuming nitric acid would not only leave orange staining on his clothes it would likely disintegrate them. His relative reported that the clothing was disintegrating Fuming nitric has a tendency to degrade and oxidise any organic material and can cause it to burst into flames.  A good explanation for Yuri K's leg?

The explanation of frost bite is much more likely. Given that Yuri D clearly died before the others and yet he has far worse "frostbite" combined with Zina's face, Yuri D's clothing, Yuri D's foam on cheek, Yuri K's leg then i'd give it as 50/50 it was frostbite and not something else.
I think you would need to explain how his extremities were burned but the rest of his body wasn’t? Swirling vapour with large variation in density creating localised effects perhaps. For the electrical narrative it's easy.

Regards

Star man

Hi Nigel.  I would still expect more widespread chemical burns across the group.  Given the conditions frost bite is still the most likely reason.  It doesn’t rule out chemical vapour at toxic levels though.

Regards

Star man


The case for chemicals :-


white hair
orange skin
facial "burns"
orange powder on disintegrating clothes
lyudmila's brown face/white chin
foam on cheek
 

December 16, 2019, 08:38:55 AM
Reply #34
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
If there were chemicals involved would the tent not have been affected? When I looked at nitrogen dioxide as a possibility it is possible to see why the tent would not have been affected and the hikers affected due to the temperature difference,  but that is a specific chemical.

If they all had white hair and burns on their skin I think that would be stronger evidence?

Regards
Star man
 

December 16, 2019, 09:47:55 AM
Reply #35
Offline

Nigel Evans


If there were chemicals involved would the tent not have been affected? When I looked at nitrogen dioxide as a possibility it is possible to see why the tent would not have been affected and the hikers affected due to the temperature difference,  but that is a specific chemical.

If they all had white hair and burns on their skin I think that would be stronger evidence?

Regards
Star man
I don't see the connection, a nearby explosion could get them running from the tent and downwind vapour streams could be very selective. Incidentally chemicals are a good explanation for the burnt trees at the treeline...
 

December 19, 2019, 08:54:20 AM
Reply #36
Offline

MDGross



Interesting photo taken yesterday from the World Trade Center showing a snow squall blowing across Manhattan. Suppose one of the guys stepped out of the tent to relieve himself and saw something similar rushing down the mountain. Maybe he rushes back inside and tells everyone to get out of the tent and down to the trees right now. Possible? Maybe...







 

December 19, 2019, 09:41:59 AM
Reply #37
Offline

Nigel Evans



Interesting photo taken yesterday from the World Trade Center showing a snow squall blowing across Manhattan. Suppose one of the guys stepped out of the tent to relieve himself and saw something similar rushing down the mountain. Maybe he rushes back inside and tells everyone to get out of the tent and down to the trees right now. Possible? Maybe...








Maybe not?


 
 

December 19, 2019, 11:04:00 AM
Reply #38
Offline

MDGross


Hi Nigel, Pure speculation on my part (what theory isn't speculation?). The snow squall in the photo looks frightening to me. Perhaps if such a weather event happened the night of Feb. 1, the Dyatlov party was frightened and made a dash for it. But, as I say, only speculation...I do believe that a weather phenomenon or natural occurrence compelled them to flee the tent.
 

December 19, 2019, 01:24:07 PM
Reply #39
Offline

Nigel Evans


Hi Nigel, Pure speculation on my part (what theory isn't speculation?). The snow squall in the photo looks frightening to me. Perhaps if such a weather event happened the night of Feb. 1, the Dyatlov party was frightened and made a dash for it. But, as I say, only speculation...I do believe that a weather phenomenon or natural occurrence compelled them to flee the tent.


Hi there. I'm with you on speculation but not all speculation is equal. E.g. it seems safe to assert that the event that caused them to immediately exit the tent happened in complete darkness (the moon rising in the early morning and their stomach contents suggesting they ate 8 hours before death). This coupled with the presence of numerous slits on the side of the tent that overlooked the whole area seems to suggest that something extraordinary took place that was VISIBLE. Now as it seems a safe assertion that it happened in the dead of night then this something would seem to be self illuminating.


Now look at the plane photos. Damaged film or photos of something self illuminating in a snow storm with the light catching the crest of a hill?


If like me you think the frames are not damage then you're forced along the electrical phenomena or missile theories or both.


Regards



 

December 19, 2019, 03:05:24 PM
Reply #40
Offline

MDGross


Taking photos at night is difficult in terms of how long to expose the film. Doubly tough without using a tripod. Plus Zolotaryov's camera seems pretty basic. The "three heads" could be in fact the tops of trees or who knows what. The white light could be just film exposed too long, maybe it's just simply a wall of snow heading their way. I imagine if you asked 10 professional photographers about this photo, you'd probably get 10 different answers. Difficult to base missile or electrical discharge theories on the Krivonischenko and Zolotaryov photos.
 

December 19, 2019, 03:42:38 PM
Reply #41
Offline

Nigel Evans


Taking photos at night is difficult in terms of how long to expose the film. Doubly tough without using a tripod. Plus Zolotaryov's camera seems pretty basic. The "three heads" could be in fact the tops of trees or who knows what. The white light could be just film exposed too long, maybe it's just simply a wall of snow heading their way.


No you're not getting it. Either all these shots have to be explained as damage or if not where is the illumination coming from?

 

December 20, 2019, 11:00:12 AM
Reply #42
Offline

MDGross


Not saying the film was damaged. But taking a photo at night with no flash is very difficult. The photo will end up mostly black or if the shutter is open too long terribly distorted – too much white light and blurry. Who knows what Semyon and the others were looking at? Perhaps a meteor shower or the Northern Lights. Siberia in the winter is one of the best places in the world to see those. Could have been the flash from a rocket explosion, but could have been dozens of other things. Without more reliable evidence of a missile or rocket test, I don't believe these photos can be trusted.






 

December 21, 2019, 06:23:21 AM
Reply #43
Offline

Nigel Evans


You don't cut 9 slits in your tent for meteor showers or northern lights (i assert). It has to be something more extraordinary possibly scary. I'd agree that the photos can't be trusted but equally i would say that Semyon was trying to photograph something and used several frames to do it. Note also that this perspective applies to the photos from Rustem's and Yuri K's cameras although a lot of effort is made to dismiss them as exposure errors during processing.
So that's the case i think - in the dead of night there were visible events that resulted in 9 slits and mystery frames from three cameras. It is reasonable to argue that these events were the cause of - white hair, orange brown skin, facial burns (Zina), brown face/white chin (Lyudmila), orange powder on disintegrating clothing plus foam on cheek (Yuri D). A looser association can be made for - burnt treeline, Yuri K's burnt leg, Rustem's trauma, footsteps in powder @ -10/-15C shouldn't have persisted for three weeks, Yuri D's frostbite.

The most obvious single cause is of course - missiles with liquid fuel exploding upwind of the group.
 

December 21, 2019, 03:27:59 PM
Reply #44
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
You don't cut 9 slits in your tent for meteor showers or northern lights (i assert). It has to be something more extraordinary possibly scary. I'd agree that the photos can't be trusted but equally i would say that Semyon was trying to photograph something and used several frames to do it. Note also that this perspective applies to the photos from Rustem's and Yuri K's cameras although a lot of effort is made to dismiss them as exposure errors during processing.
So that's the case i think - in the dead of night there were visible events that resulted in 9 slits and mystery frames from three cameras. It is reasonable to argue that these events were the cause of - white hair, orange brown skin, facial burns (Zina), brown face/white chin (Lyudmila), orange powder on disintegrating clothing plus foam on cheek (Yuri D). A looser association can be made for - burnt treeline, Yuri K's burnt leg, Rustem's trauma, footsteps in powder @ -10/-15C shouldn't have persisted for three weeks, Yuri D's frostbite.

The most obvious single cause is of course - missiles with liquid fuel exploding upwind of the group.

What would the logic be for cutting viewing slits in the tent for exploding missiles?

Wouldn’t the most logical reason be to allow the hikers to observe something while remaining concealed themselves?  Why conceal yourself from a missile?  Would it not be more logical to conceal yourself from something that could see you?

Regards
Star man
 

December 21, 2019, 04:19:49 PM
Reply #45
Offline

Nigel Evans


You don't cut 9 slits in your tent for meteor showers or northern lights (i assert). It has to be something more extraordinary possibly scary. I'd agree that the photos can't be trusted but equally i would say that Semyon was trying to photograph something and used several frames to do it. Note also that this perspective applies to the photos from Rustem's and Yuri K's cameras although a lot of effort is made to dismiss them as exposure errors during processing.
So that's the case i think - in the dead of night there were visible events that resulted in 9 slits and mystery frames from three cameras. It is reasonable to argue that these events were the cause of - white hair, orange brown skin, facial burns (Zina), brown face/white chin (Lyudmila), orange powder on disintegrating clothing plus foam on cheek (Yuri D). A looser association can be made for - burnt treeline, Yuri K's burnt leg, Rustem's trauma, footsteps in powder @ -10/-15C shouldn't have persisted for three weeks, Yuri D's frostbite.

The most obvious single cause is of course - missiles with liquid fuel exploding upwind of the group.

What would the logic be for cutting viewing slits in the tent for exploding missiles?

Wouldn’t the most logical reason be to allow the hikers to observe something while remaining concealed themselves?  Why conceal yourself from a missile?  Would it not be more logical to conceal yourself from something that could see you?

Regards
Star man

1. If you didn't know what they were they could be frightening.
2. The possibility exists that the missiles were aimed at something producing a radar signature and that was more frightening.
3. If a missile exploded nearby the smart thing to do would be to stay in a tent dug into a metre of snow rather than stepping outside.
Regards.


 

December 22, 2019, 08:47:40 AM
Reply #46
Offline

MDGross


Nigel, Your idea of fumes from an exploding missile has merit in terms of white hair, orange powder, orange/brown skin, slits in the tent and so forth. But if the last photos do show a missile exploding, why would the hikers walk to the trees? Wouldn't they have felt safer back inside the tent? Yes, the fumes from nitric acid would have killed them in or out of the tent, but they didn't recognize the danger of the situation. And I don't agree with your idea of a military exercise. There's a complete lack of evidence of such an exercise. Wouldn't many Soviet troops have died from the same toxic missile fumes?
I'm always open to new explanations for this tragic event, but a naturally occurring phenomenon is the simplest, most reasonable and I think most likely cause.
 

December 22, 2019, 09:53:59 AM
Reply #47
Offline

Nigel Evans


Nigel, Your idea of fumes from an exploding missile has merit in terms of white hair, orange powder, orange/brown skin, slits in the tent and so forth. But if the last photos do show a missile exploding, why would the hikers walk to the trees? Wouldn't they have felt safer back inside the tent? It's my assumption that there were multiple missiles. Yes, the fumes from nitric acid would have killed them in or out of the tent, but they didn't recognize the danger of the situation. And I don't agree with your idea of a military exercise. There's a complete lack of evidence of such an exercise. Wouldn't many Soviet troops have died from the same toxic missile fumes? I'm not suggesting that the exercise involved ground troops?
I'm always open to new explanations for this tragic event, but a naturally occurring phenomenon is the simplest, most reasonable and I think most likely cause.
Lets take a scenario. You're in the Soviet high command. You have two new missiles (1) A intercontinental cruise missile, the Burya - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burya and (2) the S-75 SAM missile - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-75_Dvina which will within a few months make history by bringing down Gary Powers U2 plane.
But there is a new kid on the block, the ICBM which promises to be invulnerable to anti aircraft (SAM) defences (from memory re-entering the atmosphere at Mach 9-10?). The proponents of this weapon argue that the Burya is a waste of valuable resources.
So a test is organised, send Buryas over the Urals (at speeds of Mach 3) and see if the S-75s can bring them down. For safety a kill zone is chosen - "Dead mountain" should do it.

The Buryas fail the test and are abandoned within 12 months. But the test and it's result is of the highest secrecy. If witnesses to the downing of these missiles have died then this is the best for national security but their bodies have to be found and accounted for. Once all the bodies are found then the matter can be wrapped up. Senior staff officers up to the rank of Colonel are involved, including a Lt Colonel with a team of sappers sweeping the mountain with metal detectors in the pretence of finding the bodies under the snow. The KGB are onsite throughout.

Now that's a scenario that imo fits and explains all the facts. I'm not suggesting it's true but it gives you my thinking for the missile theory.
 

December 22, 2019, 11:24:11 AM
Reply #48
Offline

NkZ


Did Soviet military conduct these sort of tests and more widely all exercices in Saturday evenings ?
 

December 22, 2019, 02:49:36 PM
Reply #49
Offline

MDGross


Points well taken, Nigel. If only military records could be found to prove this, you would have cracked one of the great mysteries of the 20th century. But documentation has probably disappeared. Questions: How long does it take to die after inhaling toxic missile fumes? Did the hikers die in and around the tent? Why flee to the trees once the missiles have been destroyed? Were the Dyatlov hikers' bodies planted by the Soviets in their final resting places? How are the three hikers who reportedly died from internal injuries explained? Wouldn't they have died earlier from inhaling the deadly fumes? So many questions, right. But sadly, definitive answers will probably never be found. Family members of today deserve to know.
 

December 22, 2019, 03:48:09 PM
Reply #50
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
You don't cut 9 slits in your tent for meteor showers or northern lights (i assert). It has to be something more extraordinary possibly scary. I'd agree that the photos can't be trusted but equally i would say that Semyon was trying to photograph something and used several frames to do it. Note also that this perspective applies to the photos from Rustem's and Yuri K's cameras although a lot of effort is made to dismiss them as exposure errors during processing.
So that's the case i think - in the dead of night there were visible events that resulted in 9 slits and mystery frames from three cameras. It is reasonable to argue that these events were the cause of - white hair, orange brown skin, facial burns (Zina), brown face/white chin (Lyudmila), orange powder on disintegrating clothing plus foam on cheek (Yuri D). A looser association can be made for - burnt treeline, Yuri K's burnt leg, Rustem's trauma, footsteps in powder @ -10/-15C shouldn't have persisted for three weeks, Yuri D's frostbite.

The most obvious single cause is of course - missiles with liquid fuel exploding upwind of the group.

What would the logic be for cutting viewing slits in the tent for exploding missiles?

Wouldn’t the most logical reason be to allow the hikers to observe something while remaining concealed themselves?  Why conceal yourself from a missile?  Would it not be more logical to conceal yourself from something that could see you?

Regards
Star man

1. If you didn't know what they were they could be frightening.
2. The possibility exists that the missiles were aimed at something producing a radar signature and that was more frightening.
3. If a missile exploded nearby the smart thing to do would be to stay in a tent dug into a metre of snow rather than stepping outside.
Regards.

I think it is more likely that there was some “thing “. Outside the tent.  It is unlikely that it was human.

Regards
Star man
 

December 22, 2019, 03:54:57 PM
Reply #51
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Nigel, Your idea of fumes from an exploding missile has merit in terms of white hair, orange powder, orange/brown skin, slits in the tent and so forth. But if the last photos do show a missile exploding, why would the hikers walk to the trees? Wouldn't they have felt safer back inside the tent? It's my assumption that there were multiple missiles. Yes, the fumes from nitric acid would have killed them in or out of the tent, but they didn't recognize the danger of the situation. And I don't agree with your idea of a military exercise. There's a complete lack of evidence of such an exercise. Wouldn't many Soviet troops have died from the same toxic missile fumes? I'm not suggesting that the exercise involved ground troops?
I'm always open to new explanations for this tragic event, but a naturally occurring phenomenon is the simplest, most reasonable and I think most likely cause.
Lets take a scenario. You're in the Soviet high command. You have two new missiles (1) A intercontinental cruise missile, the Burya - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burya and (2) the S-75 SAM missile - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-75_Dvina which will within a few months make history by bringing down Gary Powers U2 plane.
But there is a new kid on the block, the ICBM which promises to be invulnerable to anti aircraft (SAM) defences (from memory re-entering the atmosphere at Mach 9-10?). The proponents of this weapon argue that the Burya is a waste of valuable resources.
So a test is organised, send Buryas over the Urals (at speeds of Mach 3) and see if the S-75s can bring them down. For safety a kill zone is chosen - "Dead mountain" should do it.

The Buryas fail the test and are abandoned within 12 months. But the test and it's result is of the highest secrecy. If witnesses to the downing of these missiles have died then this is the best for national security but their bodies have to be found and accounted for. Once all the bodies are found then the matter can be wrapped up. Senior staff officers up to the rank of Colonel are involved, including a Lt Colonel with a team of sappers sweeping the mountain with metal detectors in the pretence of finding the bodies under the snow. The KGB are onsite throughout.

Now that's a scenario that imo fits and explains all the facts. I'm not suggesting it's true but it gives you my thinking for the missile theory.

It’s an interesting idea.  But I don’t think it fits all the available facts and the pattern of events.

Regards
Star man
 

December 22, 2019, 07:49:46 PM
Reply #52
Offline

lucid-nonsense


30 m/s was a worst case off the top of my head guess.  108km/hr is not a tent destroying storm .

Regards
Star man

The Swiss government's website (https://www.natural-hazards.ch/home/dealing-with-natural-hazards/wind/danger-levels-wind.html) says that in 110-140 km/h winds you can have "Movement  of securely anchored objects with a larger surface area, such as tents and scaffolding".

Quote
So, for a significant 20 celcius temperature gradient the maximum air velocity not taking account of significant resistive losses is about a half of my original guess 17 m/s.  You could probably take off another 30-50% for resistive energy losses.  Which gives a katabatic wind speed of about 20 mph.

But then there could be normal wind on top of that? The kabatic wind only blows at night, right? So it would add itself to the already fierce winds during the day.

From memory a resident in Ivdel stated that he had experienced that night the strongest winds since moving there eight years previously.

Dyatlov described it as like being in the wake of a taking off plane.
 

December 22, 2019, 11:22:58 PM
Reply #53
Offline

Nigel Evans


Nigel, Your idea of fumes from an exploding missile has merit in terms of white hair, orange powder, orange/brown skin, slits in the tent and so forth. But if the last photos do show a missile exploding, why would the hikers walk to the trees? Wouldn't they have felt safer back inside the tent? It's my assumption that there were multiple missiles. Yes, the fumes from nitric acid would have killed them in or out of the tent, but they didn't recognize the danger of the situation. And I don't agree with your idea of a military exercise. There's a complete lack of evidence of such an exercise. Wouldn't many Soviet troops have died from the same toxic missile fumes? I'm not suggesting that the exercise involved ground troops?
I'm always open to new explanations for this tragic event, but a naturally occurring phenomenon is the simplest, most reasonable and I think most likely cause.
Lets take a scenario. You're in the Soviet high command. You have two new missiles (1) A intercontinental cruise missile, the Burya - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burya and (2) the S-75 SAM missile - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-75_Dvina which will within a few months make history by bringing down Gary Powers U2 plane.
But there is a new kid on the block, the ICBM which promises to be invulnerable to anti aircraft (SAM) defences (from memory re-entering the atmosphere at Mach 9-10?). The proponents of this weapon argue that the Burya is a waste of valuable resources.
So a test is organised, send Buryas over the Urals (at speeds of Mach 3) and see if the S-75s can bring them down. For safety a kill zone is chosen - "Dead mountain" should do it.

The Buryas fail the test and are abandoned within 12 months. But the test and it's result is of the highest secrecy. If witnesses to the downing of these missiles have died then this is the best for national security but their bodies have to be found and accounted for. Once all the bodies are found then the matter can be wrapped up. Senior staff officers up to the rank of Colonel are involved, including a Lt Colonel with a team of sappers sweeping the mountain with metal detectors in the pretence of finding the bodies under the snow. The KGB are onsite throughout.

Now that's a scenario that imo fits and explains all the facts. I'm not suggesting it's true but it gives you my thinking for the missile theory.

It’s an interesting idea.  But I don’t think it fits all the available facts and the pattern of events.

Regards
Star man
What facts or pattern of events don't fit?
 

December 23, 2019, 04:09:57 AM
Reply #54
Offline

NkZ


Why make a test there on a Saturday evening in winter when you have since 1957 a nice test range with nobody around in Koura?
 

December 23, 2019, 04:45:45 AM
Reply #55
Offline

Nigel Evans


Why make a test there on a Saturday evening in winter when you have since 1957 a nice test range with nobody around in Koura?


The S-75 wasn't mobile so this scenario would require Buryas to fly within the range of deployed ground installations but in a safe area for fall out. The Sverdlovsk region was protected by S-75 units. Indeed from memory Gary Powers was shot down over Sverdlovsk.
 

December 23, 2019, 04:02:24 PM
Reply #56
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
30 m/s was a worst case off the top of my head guess.  108km/hr is not a tent destroying storm .

Regards
Star man

The Swiss government's website (https://www.natural-hazards.ch/home/dealing-with-natural-hazards/wind/danger-levels-wind.html) says that in 110-140 km/h winds you can have "Movement  of securely anchored objects with a larger surface area, such as tents and scaffolding".

Quote
So, for a significant 20 celcius temperature gradient the maximum air velocity not taking account of significant resistive losses is about a half of my original guess 17 m/s.  You could probably take off another 30-50% for resistive energy losses.  Which gives a katabatic wind speed of about 20 mph.

But then there could be normal wind on top of that? The kabatic wind only blows at night, right? So it would add itself to the already fierce winds during the day.

From memory a resident in Ivdel stated that he had experienced that night the strongest winds since moving there eight years previously.

Dyatlov described it as like being in the wake of a taking off plane.

If the hikers thought that the wind was getting strong enough to damage or destroy the tent that they may have to abandon it would you not think they would probably have prepared to leave the tent?  They were forced to leave quickly.  A Katabatic wind 300 metres from the summit is extremely unlikely.

Regards
Star man
 

December 23, 2019, 04:13:37 PM
Reply #57
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Nigel, Your idea of fumes from an exploding missile has merit in terms of white hair, orange powder, orange/brown skin, slits in the tent and so forth. But if the last photos do show a missile exploding, why would the hikers walk to the trees? Wouldn't they have felt safer back inside the tent? It's my assumption that there were multiple missiles. Yes, the fumes from nitric acid would have killed them in or out of the tent, but they didn't recognize the danger of the situation. And I don't agree with your idea of a military exercise. There's a complete lack of evidence of such an exercise. Wouldn't many Soviet troops have died from the same toxic missile fumes? I'm not suggesting that the exercise involved ground troops?
I'm always open to new explanations for this tragic event, but a naturally occurring phenomenon is the simplest, most reasonable and I think most likely cause.
Lets take a scenario. You're in the Soviet high command. You have two new missiles (1) A intercontinental cruise missile, the Burya - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burya and (2) the S-75 SAM missile - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-75_Dvina which will within a few months make history by bringing down Gary Powers U2 plane.
But there is a new kid on the block, the ICBM which promises to be invulnerable to anti aircraft (SAM) defences (from memory re-entering the atmosphere at Mach 9-10?). The proponents of this weapon argue that the Burya is a waste of valuable resources.
So a test is organised, send Buryas over the Urals (at speeds of Mach 3) and see if the S-75s can bring them down. For safety a kill zone is chosen - "Dead mountain" should do it.

The Buryas fail the test and are abandoned within 12 months. But the test and it's result is of the highest secrecy. If witnesses to the downing of these missiles have died then this is the best for national security but their bodies have to be found and accounted for. Once all the bodies are found then the matter can be wrapped up. Senior staff officers up to the rank of Colonel are involved, including a Lt Colonel with a team of sappers sweeping the mountain with metal detectors in the pretence of finding the bodies under the snow. The KGB are onsite throughout.

Now that's a scenario that imo fits and explains all the facts. I'm not suggesting it's true but it gives you my thinking for the missile theory.

It’s an interesting idea.  But I don’t think it fits all the available facts and the pattern of events.

Regards
Star man
What facts or pattern of events don't fit?

The selective exposure and burns of some of the hikers but not others.  Those with the worst burns to hands, feet and face were also the least well dressed .  Given the temperature it is far more likely to have been caused by frost bite.  It is a much simpler explanation.

Regards
Star man
 

December 24, 2019, 01:51:29 AM
Reply #58
Offline

Nigel Evans


"The selective exposure and burns of some of the hikers but not others.  Those with the worst burns to hands, feet and face were also the least well dressed .  Given the temperature it is far more likely to have been caused by frost bite.  It is a much simpler explanation."


The asymmetry of burns is easily explained by the fact that the rescue team noted that the group appeared to split up on the descent. Even within a single group people could have been metres apart which could have been significant. I'd suggest that the asymmetry is an argument against frostbite. Seven of them were similarly lightly dressed but some show no frostbite at all?
 

December 24, 2019, 09:22:23 AM
Reply #59
Offline

MDGross


Per your theory, how long did the hikers live once they began inhaling toxic fume? Minutes? Hours? Can the orange tint of their skin be explained by something else? Perhaps the missile test happened later in Feb. after the hikers were dead. Could toxic material seep into the snow and affect the bodies' skin color?