DPI noob

[KFinn]

Surprised there isn't more discussion about Wilkins' book on the forum, maybe an accidental scenario is not glamorous enough... but the navigation details answer a lot of questions that keep coming up - why was the tent on the slope, etc.

It made me realise the weather was worse than I thought that night, and also the previous day. It wasn't a calm night where murderers and spies could meet up and chase after one another, it was a freezing cold blizzard with deadly windchill.

It's obvious when you look at the photos from just a few hours before.





I couldn't understand why they lugged the stove up the mountain, above the tree line, with no firewood. Of course the answer is obvious, they DID have firewood and they used it. And I can easily imagine a stove incident in those conditions, if they packed away the chimney.

It explains the satirical newspaper, why the tent was collapsed, unfastened guy lines, snow heaped on the tent, cuts in the tent, why they abandoned it so quickly, why the group split, why there was a fight, Yuri's pulmonary edema, why the bodies were dirty, etc.

Also the lack of diary entries, they were too exhausted to fill out their personal diaries after side-stepping up the slope, and the group diary was their official record for the qualification so they didn't mention the navigation shortcuts and adjustments they were making.

Imagine jumping out of a warm tent into those conditions, it would be horrendous. How long would they stay there trying to clear the tent? They probably thought we've got to find shelter and build a fire, then return later, but the fire didn't work... it was too exposed, took too long to get going, they couldn't gather enough wood, and they froze.

You can argue they would have grabbed more clothes, but it made no difference to the outcome. You could also question why a cover-up, it's probably because of who they were (the very details that point us in the wrong direction towards spy theories), and the fact nobody could explain what happened.

If this scenario is the answer, they had no chance of survival but look how hard they tried. Great book, it's made me re-think. One more step down the rabbit-hole... I'm sure the next one will do the same!

Your last paragraph especially is spot on.  Leaving the tent cemented their destiny but they fought hard to stay alive.  These guys were very experienced and actually pretty logical thinkers (for the engineers, that seems to be a prerequisite, lol!!)  They were always problem solving in unique ways; to build radios for shorter hikes, to make better equipment, even the stove or the way that they figured out how to blaze their trail on the hike when the snow conditions weren't optimal. 

I think the stove part lost Wilkins credibility with people (which is too bad because there is so much more in the book,) just because it seemed illogical.  The stove wasn't used to cook.  It wasn't possibly to cook with it; it was basically a muffler design that was suspended from the ridge rope of the tent.  But, they wouldn't have put it all together and suspended it just to use it for a short time and then stash it away for the night.  It took over an hour to assemble and a fair amount of time for the fire to die down and it too cool enough to be disassembled and stowed.  I'm also not certain why you'd only heat it for a short time when you'd want it for the whole night.  That would throw off your cold acclimation. 

The weather on that particular night is debated.  There are a lot of witness statements in the case files that it was really bad in Ivdel, Polochnoe and around the region.  The pictures certainly show storm conditions.  They had had unseasonably warm days up until that point, which could indicate severe weather change coming.  But a recent analysis of weather conditions then said there wasn't anything unusual.  I feel there was a storm and the winds on the ridge were already legendary.  I think weather had an integral role in the events, although the how changes daily for me, lol!  This poor group, it just seems that whatever happened, it was a perfect storm of dominoes going down :(

[ash73]

How are you getting on with Rakitin? I appreciate there's a lot to get through. His book is the only one I jumped around while reading, I left the cold war stuff to the end because I wanted to read what he thought happened on the night first.

[KFinn]

How are you getting on with Rakitin? I appreciate there's a lot to get through. His book is the only one I jumped around while reading, I left the cold war stuff to the end because I wanted to read what he thought happened on the night first.

I haven't gotten as far as I'd like, to be honest.  Yesterday, I lost almost all of my reading time to family stuff but I did have a tele show on for background noise that was on spy craft through the years.  Now, I'm really anxious to get back to reading him tonight, lol!!

[ash73]

Here's a quick summary of the books I've read so far, in order of preference... thought it might be useful for other newbies:

Clark Wilkins - A Compelling Unknown Force
- easy to digest, excellent details on the route navigation and a simple and elegant solution (imo), but it doesn't seem to ignite most people's interest

Donnie Eichar - Dead Mountain
- American film producer visits Dyatlov Pass in the present day in parallel to recounting the story of the hikers, and proposes an interesting scientific theory

Aleksei Rakitin - Death Following the Trail
- 500 pages of forceful Russian prose about a spy story that will excite any military buff interested in the cold war, fascinating but far fetched, can be translated online

Svetlana Oss - Dont Go There
- Good exploration of the murderous Mansi (or killer Khanty!) theory, most people think it unlikely but it made me think twice

Keith **** - Mountain of the Dead
- Ok summary, but it deep-dives into a daft theory about supernatural lights firing energy beams so I lost interest

[ash73]

An angry bear is my Dad's favourite theory, I've been telling him all about the DPI and he's getting quite interested, he was born the same year as Igor.

[KFinn]

An angry bear is my Dad's favourite theory, I've been telling him all about the DPI and he's getting quite interested, he was born the same year as Igor.

That's really cool!!  Its awesome to be able to tap into that generation, even if they are from another country, the insight is still invaluable!!  I don't think my family understands my obsession but they do allow me to drone on and on about it, at least.  I wish my father were in better health as I think he'd really get into it.  He was a professor of American History, with a focus on WWII and after and also loved mysteries.  My mom similarly would geek on it but both of my parents have very bad health and limited time. 

[Manti]

The weather on that particular night is debated.  There are a lot of witness statements in the case files that it was really bad in Ivdel, Polochnoe and around the region.  The pictures certainly show storm conditions.  They had had unseasonably warm days up until that point, which could indicate severe weather change coming.  But a recent analysis of weather conditions then said there wasn't anything unusual.  I feel there was a storm and the winds on the ridge were already legendary.  I think weather had an integral role in the events, although the how changes daily for me, lol!  This poor group, it just seems that whatever happened, it was a perfect storm of dominoes going down :(

Usually it's considerably warmer (~10C difference) during heavy snowfall than in sunny weather, I think this would apply even in the Urals; seems like so from looking at more recent weather there.

[KFinn]

The weather on that particular night is debated.  There are a lot of witness statements in the case files that it was really bad in Ivdel, Polochnoe and around the region.  The pictures certainly show storm conditions.  They had had unseasonably warm days up until that point, which could indicate severe weather change coming.  But a recent analysis of weather conditions then said there wasn't anything unusual.  I feel there was a storm and the winds on the ridge were already legendary.  I think weather had an integral role in the events, although the how changes daily for me, lol!  This poor group, it just seems that whatever happened, it was a perfect storm of dominoes going down :(

Usually it's considerably warmer (~10C difference) during heavy snowfall than in sunny weather, I think this would apply even in the Urals; seems like so from looking at more recent weather there.

My friend, while you are most probably right, can you share this with Mother Nature?  We just went from 40F with sun to a -13F wind chill and heavy snow in less than 24 hours and I'm really just ready for something consistent, lol!!!! 

[ash73]

The temperature is much lower at night with a clear sky (water vapour in clouds is a much better insulator than CO2!). Think of the frost you get on your car windscreen in the morning after a clear winter night... But wind chill is the issue, it's critical to know what the wind speed was that night, and also visibility.

Regards books, Igor Pavlov & Teodora Hadjiyska - 1079 is up next, I've saved the best 'till last!

[ash73]

Regards books, Igor Pavlov & Teodora Hadjiyska - 1079 is up next, I've saved the best 'till last!

Interesting book, I was quite relieved when I saw it's only 200 pages, I was expecting an encyclopedia, but it's very dense and not an easy read. I'm normally quite good at taking stuff in but I will have to go back and re-read a lot of it.

I really like the route maps, it's the only book I've read so far which looks at the whole hike and where they were planning to go next; which is key to understanding where the tent and labaz were, and why. The diagrams are great but I find the descriptions confusing, always talking about moving from one river valley to another, never bearings and landmarks.

I like the idea of the tree falling on the tent, it's a clever original idea but obviously it depends on you first buying into the tent being in the trees. Very unlucky it fell lengthways along the tent and I'm not convinced it explains all the injuries, in fact it was odd the book glossed over the autopsy findings, which are reliable facts. But maybe the truth is that boring.

I can believe there was a cover-up, but there's a confusing web of similar sounding names, incredibly long job titles, committees, meetings, radiograms etc, it's not always clear what point the author is trying to make. After several sections I was left thinking "so what? what does it mean?". There's too little commentary so it's hard work to understand, and some of the details could be put in an appendix.

And when you think about it, it's an extraordinary amount of effort to cover up an accidental death. It would have been simpler just to collect up the tent and bodies and bring them to the town, and remove everything from the scene. Then you could be vague about where they were found and just say it was an accident. The book even mentions a cook's body being retrieved on a sledge and there was no investigation.

The book is not clear about certain details of the scenario, e.g. where precisely was the tent? where were the bodies? how did those with minor injuries die? why didn't they grab clothes and tools from the tent? how did 4 die in the tent and end up with extra clothes? The final chapter needs fleshing out a bit, imo.

Overall I think I'd put it in the lower half of my list, well worth reading, lots of good data, love the maps, but a bit impenetrable and the final timeline of events is not quite resolved. I might revisit that after re-reading it. It's interesting every book has different information, and comes at it from a different angle.

I'll pop onto the book comments thread later and ask some questions.

[ash73]

So the labaz on the mountain... decoding these photos is key. I can see the sense of putting the storage on the return route, and I did think it looked more like a hole than a surface when I first saw them, but I'd be concerned about the flag being blown away and the storage being lost.



I can see 18 skis, 4-5 people digging, what are the rest doing? Why would they all go up the slope, and remove their skis? And it seems like a big hole to store 55kg, it should be maybe 2/3 the size of a person. And I think someone mentioned the camera settings and lighting indicated early evening, but it should be the morning of 1 Feb.

Plus, in this scenario we're talking about conspiritors lugging the tent (and contents) up the mountain, removing the storage, erecting the tent, walking NE down the mountain via the same route (4+4 footprints) carrying 55kg of items, then walking a mile South to install the new storage. Why not walk SE to the new storage location? It seems like a lot of effort. And why not just leave everything in the tent, the diaries don't say they made storage yet.

Plus, if the conspiritors improvised the storage later, when people started commenting certains items were missing, boots, skis, food, etc... then they didn't make storage, so you can't explain the photos.

[KFinn]

Regards books, Igor Pavlov & Teodora Hadjiyska - 1079 is up next, I've saved the best 'till last!

Interesting book, I was quite relieved when I saw it's only 200 pages, I was expecting an encyclopedia, but it's very dense and not an easy read. I'm normally quite good at taking stuff in but I will have to go back and re-read a lot of it.

I really like the route maps, it's the only book I've read so far which looks at the whole hike and where they were planning to go next; which is key to understanding where the tent and labaz were, and why. The diagrams are great but I find the descriptions confusing, always talking about moving from one river valley to another, never bearings and landmarks.

I like the idea of the tree falling on the tent, it's a clever original idea but obviously it depends on you first buying into the tent being in the trees. Very unlucky it fell lengthways along the tent and I'm not convinced it explains all the injuries, in fact it was odd the book glossed over the autopsy findings, which are reliable facts. But maybe the truth is that boring.

I can believe there was a cover-up, but there's a confusing web of similar sounding names, incredibly long job titles, committees, meetings, radiograms etc, it's not always clear what point the author is trying to make. After several sections I was left thinking "so what? what does it mean?". There's too little commentary so it's hard work to understand, and some of the details could be put in an appendix.

And when you think about it, it's an extraordinary amount of effort to cover up an accidental death. It would have been simpler just to collect up the tent and bodies and bring them to the town, and remove everything from the scene. Then you could be vague about where they were found and just say it was an accident. The book even mentions a cook's body being retrieved on a sledge and there was no investigation.

The book is not clear about certain details of the scenario, e.g. where precisely was the tent? where were the bodies? how did those with minor injuries die? why didn't they grab clothes and tools from the tent? how did 4 die in the tent and end up with extra clothes? The final chapter needs fleshing out a bit, imo.

Overall I think I'd put it in the lower half of my list, well worth reading, lots of good data, love the maps, but a bit impenetrable and the final timeline of events is not quite resolved. I might revisit that after re-reading it. It's interesting every book has different information, and comes at it from a different angle.

I'll pop onto the book comments thread later and ask some questions.

I personally read it through three times.  The first time was a power read because I was really excited.  The next two were to process all of it and cement it in my head.  Its an amazing reference tool for looking up information on people involved and specifics of of timeline and route.  And it really made the searchers and other students feel more real and dimensional to me.  The amount of work that went into it was astronomical! 

I do have questions about the theory, as well.  I can see it unfolding along these lines and I really do *want* it to have all been a natural accident because I've come to hold the group in high esteem; they had great integrity, they were hardworking, fun loving, dedicated, strong people.  They fought to stay alive, no matter what the circumstances were.  For me, I want it to be an accident and not anything nefarious.  But, wanting it thus and reality don't often intersect, lol! 

[ash73]

It's like a jigsaw puzzle where every theory has to first take 100 random pieces off the table, because they don't all fit.

[KFinn]

It's like a jigsaw puzzle where every theory has to first take 100 random pieces off the table, because they don't all fit.

That's an excellent analogy!!!!

[ash73]

I'm beginning to wonder if Moscow were in fact telling the truth about an avalanche... but only a partial truth.

We know the slope of 1079 is insufficient, but if there was a catalyst that could cause an avalanche, then most everything fits... especially if said catalyst was observed as lights in the sky.

For example:
- tent is dug into the slope of 1079 making layered snow vulnerable to movement
- MacGuffin* explodes nearby on the mountain
- explosion causes vibration, which causes avalanche & noise
- hikers panic, cut their way out of the tent
- hikers run down the slope leaving clothes/tools behind
- hikers make a fire, groups splits, some keep the fire going others make a den
- fire is not working, two Yuris die, small scuffle breaks out, clothes are scavanged
- Rustem ascends slope and dies, followed by Igor and Zina
- rav4 make a den, their movements disturb the snow, causing avalanche in the ravine
- rav4 fall on rocks and are buried in snow
- lights in the sky Feb 17 are helicopters retrieving MacGuffin wreckage
- authorities close the case down because investigator sends radiograms in the clear about orbs & rockets
- cover up because authorities don't want people to discover what CAUSED the avalanche

*MacGuffin could be rocket launched from Kapustin Yar or Baikonur, or a spent stage, or local SAM test, or parachute mines from Tu-95, radioactive or not... choose your poison it doesn't matter.

[KFinn]

I'm beginning to wonder if Moscow were in fact telling the truth about an avalanche... but only a partial truth.

We know the slope of 1079 is insufficient, but if there was a catalyst that could cause an avalanche, then most everything fits... especially if said catalyst was observed as lights in the sky.

For example:
- tent is dug into the slope of 1079 making layered snow vulnerable to movement
- MacGuffin* explodes nearby on the mountain
- explosion causes vibration, which causes avalanche & noise
- hikers panic, cut their way out of the tent
- hikers run down the slope leaving clothes/tools behind
- hikers make a fire, groups splits, some keep the fire going others make a den
- fire is not working, two Yuris die, small scuffle breaks out, clothes are scavanged
- Rustem ascends slope and dies, followed by Igor and Zina
- rav4 make a den, their movements disturb the snow, causing avalanche in the ravine
- rav4 fall on rocks and are buried in snow
- lights in the sky Feb 17 are helicopters retrieving MacGuffin wreckage
- authorities close the case down because investigator sends radiograms in the clear about orbs & rockets
- cover up because authorities don't want people to discover what CAUSED the avalanche

*MacGuffin could be rocket launched from Kapustin Yar or Baikonur, or a spent stage, or local SAM test, or parachute mines from Tu-95, radioactive or not... choose your poison it doesn't matter.

Even if there was no avalanche, loud noises and vibrations that sounded like one could initiate them leaving the tent.  It doesn't necessarily need an actual, physical avalanche, for them to fear that one is imminent and try to get to safety.  This has often been my thought.  However, they did not take evasive maneuvers as far as the direction they traveled.  But, if it was still snowing and they were disoriented...  I could see it, personally. 

[RMK]

I'm beginning to wonder if Moscow were in fact telling the truth about an avalanche... but only a partial truth.

We know the slope of 1079 is insufficient, but if there was a catalyst that could cause an avalanche, then most everything fits... especially if said catalyst was observed as lights in the sky.

For example:
- tent is dug into the slope of 1079 making layered snow vulnerable to movement
- MacGuffin* explodes nearby on the mountain
- explosion causes vibration, which causes avalanche & noise
- hikers panic, cut their way out of the tent
- hikers run down the slope leaving clothes/tools behind
- hikers make a fire, groups splits, some keep the fire going others make a den
- fire is not working, two Yuris die, small scuffle breaks out, clothes are scavanged
- Rustem ascends slope and dies, followed by Igor and Zina
- rav4 make a den, their movements disturb the snow, causing avalanche in the ravine
- rav4 fall on rocks and are buried in snow
- lights in the sky Feb 17 are helicopters retrieving MacGuffin wreckage
- authorities close the case down because investigator sends radiograms in the clear about orbs & rockets
- cover up because authorities don't want people to discover what CAUSED the avalanche

*MacGuffin could be rocket launched from Kapustin Yar or Baikonur, or a spent stage, or local SAM test, or parachute mines from Tu-95, radioactive or not... choose your poison it doesn't matter.

Even if there was no avalanche, loud noises and vibrations that sounded like one could initiate them leaving the tent.  It doesn't necessarily need an actual, physical avalanche, for them to fear that one is imminent and try to get to safety.  This has often been my thought.  However, they did not take evasive maneuvers as far as the direction they traveled.  But, if it was still snowing and they were disoriented...  I could see it, personally.

Well, most of the Dyatlov Nine would know better than to try to outrun an avalanche downhill.  Plus, they weren't the sort of people who are easily frightened and prone to panic.  And yet, the evidence is consistent with scenarios in which they did panic, causing them to do irrational things (like abandoning the tent...assuming they really did camp on the hillside).  So, lately I've been reconsidering the infrasound theory.  What if the effects of infrasound made a majority of them--maybe even all of them, to some extent--unusually anxious and jumpy?  Then, all it would take would be some sudden, unexpected event--ash73's "MacGuffin", perhaps--to startle a group of normally level-headed people into full-blown panic!  And then, one thing leads to another, and the scenario plays itself out to its tragic conclusion.

In other words, maybe the psychological effect of infrasound didn't by itself cause the group to behave irrationally, but it did put them in an emotional state in which they were unusually vulnerable to being scared out of their wits by some sudden, unexpected event.

[ash73]

Yes the MacGuffin could be katabatic wind, infrasound or the stove... but they don't fit with the coverup or lights in the sky. It depends which jigsaw pieces you choose...

Politicians like telling half truths though.

[ash73]

... or infrasound (or even just a severe blizzard) could have exacerbated a MacGuffin, as RMK suggests.

[ash73]

I'm curious why the flat area dug out for the tent should look something like this:




(photo courtesy of WAB)

But actually looks like this - the two men are standing precisely where they should be a ridge, or snow wall, above the tent:





If they did cut out a level platform, it's evident a significant volume of snow has been displaced.