May 28, 2022, 10:37:06 AM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: Translation from map  (Read 735 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

April 14, 2021, 08:28:20 PM
Read 735 times



I was looking through the case files this evening and wondering if there are any native Russian speakers here who can translate the words in this image? 

Thank you.

April 15, 2021, 01:37:34 PM
Reply #1



I was looking through the case files this evening and wondering if there are any native Russian speakers here who can translate the words in this image? 

Thank you.

This action is not difficult for those for whom Russian is the primary language. And if someone has clear idea of what is marked there.
For clarity, let's divide this picture into three parts:

1 - this means the direction to the top "height 1023 m". The azimuth (0 magnetic) was determined to be 350 degrees. This is almost exactly to the north. Missing only 10 degrees in the deviation to the west.
2 - means the direction "to the creek", which should be understood as the creek near where the bodies were found near the cedar. Since there is no unambiguous point there, this azimuth = 40 degrees , can be considered very approximate.
3 - azimuth = 90 degrees (this is the exact direction to the east) with the inscription "on the rock. The interesting thing is that on the ground is not the direction of the big island stone, which is now a memorial plaque, and the other is closer to the "height of 880" - at that time, or 905 - now. There's not even one stone, but two next to each other. They resemble sitting lions or dogs ("2 lions") . Why this is directed there and not at the larger stone, which is more prominent, is very difficult to say. Most likely it is the result of lack of time for such drawings and their verification.
On topographic map it would look like this:

it can be increased.

On this diagram, point "7" marks the place of the tent.
Point "1" is the "height of 1023 m," or the mountain Pumsalnel. which now has a height of 1055 m. although it may have been selected mountain Yanygkhachahl. It is marked with point "6". It does have  height of 1023 m, but it is already on the new measurements, which were made 4 years later, after all the events, so the search participants did not have maps with that height. The difference in azimuths there is small. If you take the exact azimuths, both of these values have an error of 2 ... 4 degrees, and the value of the mark on the note Maslennikov marked very "round number" = 350 degrees (signifying  large error), so it does not matter.
Points "2" and "3" are two extreme points, so that you can take as a reference point such as the "creek". They, too, are not exactly 40 degrees, and have an error.
Point "5" coincides exactly with the landmark "2 lions". Here we can consider the direction chosen accurately, almost without error.
Point "4" is located on large island stone, on which memorial plaque is now installed.  Here you can clearly see the difference in directions "5" and "4". Perhaps the choice of landmarks was made this way because at the time of measuring landmark "4" was temporarily obscured by fog or there was poor visibility for some other reason, while landmark "5" was clearly visible.
As a summary, we can say that these directions give general picture of where things may be and you can roughly determine the area of the tent location, but it cannot be done very accurately. You need other methods for that. And they were used already in 2008 and later. Therefore, the exact location of the tent with an accuracy of +/- 10...15 meters or 30...50 ft, can now be considered known.
By the way, in the very bottom inserted photo shows Mikhail Sharavin, who was the very first find the tent. This was in 2009, when we worked with him on the tent site to investigate the same issue in detail.
The rest of the pictures show locations along these lines. You can't see them well because they are shallow, but if you have desire see them fully and in detail, I can post them next time.

April 15, 2021, 03:01:40 PM
Reply #2


Oh my goodness WAB!  Thank you so much.  That is far more of a complete and thorough response than I hoped to get.  I really appreciate you taking your time to do that. 

When you visited the tent site with Mr. Sharavin did you happen to get a GPS coordinate?  I would be very interested in that if you were willing to share.  It looks like a beautiful spot. 

April 17, 2021, 10:30:13 AM
Reply #3


I think like above this sketch can be explained by assuming it's made based on massive measurement errors.

This is possible....

But I think if we take it seriously, of course there are measurement errors and these are rounded numbers, but if we assume reasonable care was taken then it paints a very different picture than commonly accepted these days.

  • 350° to the height of 1023m: No matter where on Kholat you are, Pumsalnel (today a height of 1056m) is to the NE, not NW. I do not think such a massive measurement error should be assumed. Therefore "1023" does not refer to Pumsalnel.
  • There is a no-name peak of approx. 1010m between Pumsalnel and Otorten. This is directly North of Kholat. Could "1023" refer to this?
  • Alternatively, could it refer to Motyevchakhl (1096m today, ru. Моттёвчахль)?
  • 90° to the rock: Well, from Google satellite images, it looks like the rock formations are almost exactly on a straight E-W line. So it does not matter if it's Boot rock or the "Lions"... this sketch is telling us the tent was directly to the West of these rocks.  This puts the tent on the eastern slope of Kholat  thumb1 , but further to the south compared to commonly shown tent positions.
  • 40° to the ravine: The ravine's location is not precise, but the creek itself (this upper stretch of the stream ultimately flowing into Lozva) follows an almost exactly 40° angle.
  • Therefore this tells us the tent was somewhere on the same "line". This also puts the tent south of commonly shown locations. There was a description of the bodies being found on an almost straight line between the tent and the cedar and the tent being on the extension of the ravine's trajectory seems to be in accord with this.
This is very unscientific but I will put this coordinate here: 61.75371, 59.43157. This is my very rough guess of a point from where the rocks are ~90°, the ravine  ~42° and the no-name peak (~1010m) is -3° aka 357°.This is a weird location to camp.... really, anywhere on Kholat is weird, but this particular location (or any other from where the rocks are 90° and the ravine 40°) is going to be closer to Auspiya valley than Lozva. This is closer to the labaz than to the cedar. The Auspiya valley treeline (contemporary) is 0.88 miles,  Lozvavalley's treeline is 0.89 miles. This is to the conifer "treeline" not to the area where birches start.If we consider birch treeline, Auspiya birches are very close, 0.3 mile... Lozva birches are 0.7 mile (Lozva valley has only a thin band of birches above the conifer forest, unlike Auspiya valley).

Maybe I'm wrong... maybe this sketch is wrong... but I think it needs to be considered that conclusions drawn from the different angles on the sketch are self-consistent (both suggest the tent was more to the south than commonly believed), and consistent with other observations of searchers. 
I want to add, this is also where you end up if you follow Auspiya (right tributary stream) out of the treeline then continue straight.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2021, 10:58:49 AM by Manti »