October 16, 2021, 11:35:27 AM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: What's The Worst Thing They Could Do?  (Read 3627 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

May 08, 2018, 09:28:17 AM
Read 3627 times
Offline

CalzagheChick


My ex-husband, the cardio-thoracic surgeon, and I used to have a routine. He LOVED watching survival shows like Naked & Afraid, Dual Survivor, and anything with Bear Grylls. We used to watch these shows on our very rare off moments we'd have to share together. I personally am not a survivalist type of person. If the world collapsed today and there was no Walmart to get groceries from, I'm completely useless. John, however, came from a very poor family in the southern US. He's what you'd call a country boy through and through--Blue collar background with a white collar education/profession. He grew up with alcoholic parents that pretty much ignored their dozen kids. The kids certainly had to fend for themselves so they all know how to grow crops, hunt, fish, camp, and otherwise live off grid. I used to love that about him actually.

So getting to the point, in all of these survival shows, they mostly go about showing survival in tropical/subtropical climates because no TV station wants to stick two people out in Siberia naked and risk that lawsuit. It's much more predictable to stick naked people in hot climates and tell them to survive for 28 days on inhospitable islands or alligator-infested swampland. Exposure in these climates would be less detrimental than if they were dropped off in Siberia.

Only a few survivalists actually go into colder climates like that of Croatia or Canada... the thing is when I've watched these survival tests in freezing tundras, almost all of them have said the same thing:

The worst thing you can do in a survival situation in below freezing temperatures is to break a sweat.

To be honest, I'm a little surprised nobody has brought this up before. I've never been comfortable with the den because if they actually built that den, they'd have certainly broken a sweat doing so turning their already poor odds to lethal. But they'd HAVE to have known that!

So I don't get it.
 

May 08, 2018, 10:06:05 AM
Reply #1
Offline

Armide


I actually love hiking and I've had my fair share of winter hikes, this hits home a bit for me  tongue2 I've never been outside in the Ural Mountains half-naked running away from an 'unknown compelling force' or anything, but sweating even if you're not at risk for hypothermia just feels super uncomfortable in the cold, and people usually start unzipping their jackets after a certain amount of effort even if they're in the cold. Dyatlov was found with his coat open, maybe he broke a sweat trying to walk up the hill and knew this, so he unbuttoned it? It could be a possible explanation for some details
 

May 08, 2018, 01:07:53 PM
Reply #2
Offline

Loose}{Cannon

Global Moderator
Yup, I have done my share of physical activity in freezing temperatures and have gone through cold climate training in the USMC.  The problem with sweating is your clothing becomes saturated and once you come to a rest and your internal body temperature stabilizes, the wet under clothing freezes which actually starts to drag your core temperature down.  In other words, its a bad idea to dunk your clothing in water, put it on your body, and then step out into freezing temperatures.

There are two main way to combat this issue.

#1  Take off or unbutton layers in efforts to dry out while working/moving.
#2  When you stop working/moving, strip down, air out, and dry clothing.  Ever wonder how Rustem burned his jacket?   
All theories are flawed....... Get Behind Me Satan !!!
 

May 08, 2018, 04:06:25 PM
Reply #3
Offline

WAB


  Ever wonder how Rustem burned his jacket?

It is absolutely everyday occurence on similar travel at that time - 60 years ago.
Sitting at a fire, it is difficult to follow when the small piece of coal will get on such jacket which "TELOGREIKA (in Russan) - Padded jacket" is called. It is from words "to heat a body" (to keep heat more precisely).

The padded jacket consists of a cotton cloth outside and from within, and its interiors consist of cotton cotton wool. When the piece of coal will get to it, it starts to smoulder. To extinguish it it is impossible. It is possible to remove only a piece of cotton wool which smoulder. But it be removed should only completely.

That is my old padded jacket where the small piece of coal has got, but was possible to find at once this place and to remove a smoulder piece.
 


My piece of coal has got in front, therefore it was possible to find at once. If it gets behind (Rustem could sit a back to a fire) it would be found out very much late.
In a padded jacket it is visible nothing, therefore to find place which burns is almost impossible. It is especially difficult, if long it is not possible to define that already there is a process to smoulder. Therefore such padded jackets burn out very big pieces. As in that picture Slobodin`s padded jacket on February, 01st 1959.
 
« Last Edit: May 08, 2018, 04:27:03 PM by Loose}{Cannon »
 

May 13, 2018, 11:46:18 PM
Reply #4
Offline

CalzagheChick


That photo always makes me sad. I picture him posing in this ridiculously burned up jacket with that face and everybody giving him grief and laughing about it including whoever took the photo trying to hold still from laughing to get a clear picture.

I've never really considered Rustem's burnt up jacket as evidence to anything. I've never thought of it beyond a funny picture really. A picture taken for the hikers to remember this trip with the fondest of memories.
 

May 14, 2018, 05:12:09 AM
Reply #5
Offline

Per Inge Oestmoen


Yes, absolutely. A burned jacket is perfectly normal if you are an outdoor type of person. It is even inevitable.

I would say that if you have no burns at all on any of your clothes, you probably should spend more time outdoors and make more cozy fires.
 

September 25, 2018, 05:13:13 PM
Reply #6
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
The worst thing they could do is what they actually did ie they left the tent, their place of refuge. So whatever caused them to leave the tent must play a major part in this mystery.
DB
 

January 26, 2021, 01:36:19 PM
Reply #7
Offline

RidgeWatcher


Calzaghe Chick,

Quote
That photo always makes me sad. I picture him posing in this ridiculously burned up jacket with that face and everybody giving him grief and laughing about it including whoever took the photo trying to hold still from laughing to get a clear picture.

I've never really considered Rustem's burnt up jacket as evidence to anything. I've never thought of it beyond a funny picture really. A picture taken for the hikers to remember this trip with the fondest of memories.

I always thought that Rustem's pose was very funny because I always thought that was Yuri DOroshenko's jacket that Zina had burned which made him swear at her. I always thought Rustik was a trying to turn an angry situation into a funny one. So whose jacket was this?
 

January 26, 2021, 04:11:13 PM
Reply #8

eurocentric

Guest
My ex-husband, the cardio-thoracic surgeon, and I used to have a routine. He LOVED watching survival shows like Naked & Afraid, Dual Survivor, and anything with Bear Grylls. We used to watch these shows on our very rare off moments we'd have to share together. I personally am not a survivalist type of person. If the world collapsed today and there was no Walmart to get groceries from, I'm completely useless. John, however, came from a very poor family in the southern US. He's what you'd call a country boy through and through--Blue collar background with a white collar education/profession. He grew up with alcoholic parents that pretty much ignored their dozen kids. The kids certainly had to fend for themselves so they all know how to grow crops, hunt, fish, camp, and otherwise live off grid. I used to love that about him actually.

So getting to the point, in all of these survival shows, they mostly go about showing survival in tropical/subtropical climates because no TV station wants to stick two people out in Siberia naked and risk that lawsuit. It's much more predictable to stick naked people in hot climates and tell them to survive for 28 days on inhospitable islands or alligator-infested swampland. Exposure in these climates would be less detrimental than if they were dropped off in Siberia.

Only a few survivalists actually go into colder climates like that of Croatia or Canada... the thing is when I've watched these survival tests in freezing tundras, almost all of them have said the same thing:

The worst thing you can do in a survival situation in below freezing temperatures is to break a sweat.

To be honest, I'm a little surprised nobody has brought this up before. I've never been comfortable with the den because if they actually built that den, they'd have certainly broken a sweat doing so turning their already poor odds to lethal. But they'd HAVE to have known that!

So I don't get it.

In a hypothermia theory the breaking into a sweat would begin on the ridge, when digging a 12x4ft trench, 3ft deep, in a crusty snowcap following an arduous ascent, and logically explains why the trench diggers were stripped down, which would be to air themselves off, their backs wet.

The critical mistake is then to sit in an unheated tent, possibly doing so because either the wind was suddenly too strong to support the elongated tent ridge, so the overhead stove couldn't be set up, or they didn't bring enough fuel and had to put off lighting it until bedtime. If they had limited wood with them, taking only a small amount because they had originally planned to crest the ridge when they set off, they couldn't risk burning all that fuel before the coldest point, around 4am, to which time someone would need to be on fire watch, to reload the grate every few hours.

Rather than first becoming hypothermic and then paradoxically undressing, the hikers would have stripped down when they were warm and sweated from their exertions, and then their core temperatures gradually fell in an unheated tent until they felt warm through hypothermia's effects and then remained paradoxically undressed, convincing themselves things were not that bad and they were tough enough, so they didn't redress themselves and recover the situation. It's possible they may have had to fell the tent as the wind picked up too, perhaps cutting through and then kicking the ski pole if the support rope was tied too tight and frozen, so then things get far worse when they are in an icy grave, in their trench.

An experiment was conducted with 9 people walking down the pass at night, and they all arrived at the forest unscathed and so assumed the 1959 hikers would have managed that without issue, but they had modern fabrics, footwear, gloves, hats, coats, and were not chillled and exhausted to start with. It was an entirely meaningless experiment, because as you suggest, potential compensation claims would be made if a realistic experiment was done, where they may have fallen and gashed/scarred themselves on the numerous rocky ridges, or developed frostbite. Even if a medivac had stood by who would want to risk that.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2021, 04:38:23 PM by eurocentric »
 

January 26, 2021, 06:00:36 PM
Reply #9
Offline

RMK


Rather than first becoming hypothermic and then paradoxically undressing, the hikers would have stripped down when they were warm and sweated from their exertions, and then their core temperatures gradually fell in an unheated tent until they felt warm through hypothermia's effects and then remained paradoxically undressed, convincing themselves things were not that bad and they were tough enough, so they didn't redress themselves and recover the situation. It's possible they may have had to fell the tent as the wind picked up too, perhaps cutting through and then kicking the ski pole if the support rope was tied too tight and frozen, so then things get far worse when they are in an icy grave, in their trench.
Emphasis mine.  Could you please further explain the part I bolded?  As it stands, that explanation makes no sense to me.

"Paradoxical undressing" occurs because the muscles that constrict capillaries--for the purpose of keeping warm blood near the body's core, and cool blood near the extremities--become exhausted.  That is the sort of thing that happens only in cases of severe, life-threatening hypothermia.  If the Dyatlovites' core temperatures "gradually fell in an unheated tent", then they would have noticed that they were not sufficiently warm, and done something about that, well before they were terminally hypothermic.

I do agree that if some of the Dyatlov company had gotten sweaty from labor, then the lack of heat in the tent might have exacerbated the situation.

Edit: "constrict capillaries"
« Last Edit: January 26, 2021, 06:05:01 PM by RMK »
 

January 29, 2021, 10:49:07 AM
Reply #10

eurocentric

Guest
Only just seen your post...

Unless you suddenly got locked inside a commercial freezer then hypothermia is a gradual process, and through that gradual descent the victim does not realise what is happening, but by the time they've chilled below a certain point their mental acuity is significantly affected so they cannot help themselves, and it would then require active intervention from others.

The hikers took off their clothing in an unheated tent, not from hypothermia, it would be to air off sweat from their exertions, and would be unaware their body temperature is then slowly falling across a number of hours, with the distractions of that uni/trade union leaflet and other activity, as subzero temperatures continue to fall.

They would descend below the shivering stage, the body's attempt to stimulate circulation and get warmed up, and this can make people believe they are recovering, but the body has now abandoned the shivering jump start and is beginning to shut down blood supply to the limbs, the skin surface, the fingers and toes, the sensory nerve endings to all of these, and pooling blood to the vital organs.

Then after some time the muscles used in shutting down blood supply tire, and suddenly release blood back to the rest of the body, which makes the person feel like they're having a hot flush. This is the stage when they usually start removing clothing as paradoxical undressing, but the hikers already had removed clothing, so they do not recover the situation with heating or redressing, they remained as they were, paradoxically undressed.
« Last Edit: January 29, 2021, 11:18:06 AM by eurocentric »
 

January 29, 2021, 11:01:19 PM
Reply #11
Offline

Manti


a gradual process, and through that gradual descent the victim does not realise what is happening
This is really not how hypothermia works, you very much realise what's happening, you feel cold, you start to shiver, it gets stronger and becomes uncontrollable even. It is possible you are not able to put on more clothes but in that case you would also not be able to walk.
Only after this does numbness and apathy set in, and what I would say is sleepyness. Again not a state you'd want to walk a mile in.
 

January 30, 2021, 10:38:18 AM
Reply #12
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
a gradual process, and through that gradual descent the victim does not realise what is happening
This is really not how hypothermia works, you very much realise what's happening, you feel cold, you start to shiver, it gets stronger and becomes uncontrollable even. It is possible you are not able to put on more clothes but in that case you would also not be able to walk.
Only after this does numbness and apathy set in, and what I would say is sleepyness. Again not a state you'd want to walk a mile in.

I agree, people certainly do know when it starts to get very cold in a very unpleasant way.
DB