Dyatlov Pass Forum
Theories Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Ziljoe on September 03, 2026, 04:46:14 PM
-
### Title: The Anatomy of a Collapse: Resolving the Dyatlov Pass Ravine Autopsies Through Fluid Dynamics
I’ve been meaning to write this post for a while. I am no expert in medical forensics or translation, but I’ve tried to work directly from the raw data and autopsy transcripts provided in the case files. I didn't use AI to write this theory for me; instead, I used it as a processing tool to cross-reference the data, map the biological findings, and see if the micro-details actually align with physics.
What I found points to an absolute structural divide in how these hikers died, completely ruling out explosions or simple falls, and landing squarely on a tragic, localized event in the ravine.
Everything in this case revolves around a single forensic marker: **the foamy blood and fluid in the lungs.**
---
### Part 1: The Two Types of "Foam"
During the 1959 autopsies, Dr. Boris Vozrozhdenny noted foaming, frothy mucus in the airways of multiple hikers. This includes those who died purely of the cold on the slope (like Yuri Doroshenko) and those who suffered catastrophic chest injuries in the ravine (like Lyudmila Dubinina).
However, looking at the exact mechanics, the forensic reality splits these into two completely different biological processes:
#### The Hypothermia Foam (The Slope / Cedar Tree Group)
* **The Mechanism:** When a human freezes to death, the body undergoes progressive cardiovascular failure. In the final stages, extreme fluid retention and a dramatic slowing of the heart rate cause a condition called pulmonary congestion.
* **The Result:** Fluid gently leaks into the airways. As the dying person takes desperate, shallow final gasps, this fluid mixes with air, creating a light, frothy, pale mucus. Crucially, in pure hypothermia cases, this fluid is confined mostly to the upper respiratory tracts (the trachea and bronchial tubes) because it accumulates right at the very end of life as the lungs shut down.
#### The Compression Foam (The Ravine Group)
* **The Mechanism:** This is where a snow cave or cornice collapse comes into play. For the victims in the ravine, the foam was heavily blood-stained and forced deep throughout the lung tissue itself.
* **The Result:** When a massive weight (like packed snow) crushes the chest wall while the heart is still forcefully pumping, it causes immense hydrostatic pressure. This literally ruptures the microscopic capillaries inside the lungs. Blood pours into the air sacs (alveoli) and mixes violently with air while the victim is still actively struggling to breathe under the load.
Finding light foam in the upper airways is a textbook indicator of terminal respiratory failure from freezing. However, finding widespread, blood-engorged froth forced deep within the respiratory tissue—combined with fractured bones—is the definitive signature of a living body suffocating under a massive, crushing external weight.
---
### Part 2: The "Plumbing Blowout" of Lyudmila Dubinina
Thinking of the heart and blood vessels as a plumbing network makes the trauma fully logical. In Dr. Vozrozhdenny's autopsy report for Lyudmila Dubinina, he explicitly noted a massive hemorrhage in the heart’s right atrium.
Using a mechanical plumbing framework, we can map exactly how that injury connects to a heavy snow mass:
1. **The Right Atrium as the "Weakest Pipe":** In the human body, the right atrium is the intake chamber that receives low-pressure, oxygen-depleted blood returning from the body before pushing it to the lungs. Because it only handles low-pressure flow, its muscular wall is thin and fragile compared to the high-pressure left side of the heart. It is the absolute weakest point in the cardiac pipeline.
2. **The Back-Pressure Effect (Hydraulic Ram):** When a massive, heavy weight slammed down onto Dubinina's chest, it caused severe, instantaneous compression. This sudden squeeze acted like a massive piston, instantly forcing all the blood in her lower body backwards up through the main veins (the vena cava) and slamming it directly into the heart. Because the thin right atrium couldn't vent that massive, sudden spike in fluid volume fast enough, the extreme back-pressure caused the tissue to tear and hemorrhage internally. In medicine, this is a known consequence of severe blunt force chest trauma.
3. **Connecting the Pipes to the Foam:** This exact plumbing blowout explains why her lungs were full of foaming blood. The same crushing force that burst her right atrium also ruptured the delicate capillaries inside her lungs. As she lay pinned under the snow, her heart was still beating (proven by the extensive internal bleeding), trying to pump blood through shattered pipes. With every desperate breath she took against the crushing weight of the snow, air mixed violently with the pooling blood in her lungs, creating that thick, frothy foam.
Her body experienced a classic, catastrophic hydraulic failure caused by an immense, uniform weight crushing her chest while she was still alive.
---
### Part 3: The Uniform Burial of Nikolai Thibeaux-Brignolle
Looking at Nikolai Thibeaux-Brignolle’s autopsy report through this same engineering framework answers why his ribs didn't snap, yet his lungs suffered the exact same fate:
1. **The Piston Effect on the Lungs:** For his lungs to release an "abundance of foamy liquid" upon being squeezed (palpated) by the pathologist, they had to be completely engorged with fluid and blood. Even without cracking his ribs, the sheer weight of the snow mass acted like a heavy clamp on his chest wall, completely immobilizing his ability to inhale.
2. **Why He Struggled to Breathe:** Because his heart kept beating (proven by the extensive bleeding into his temple muscle), it kept pumping blood into his lungs. But because his chest was physically locked down by the snow, the blood had nowhere to go. The intense back-pressure forced fluid out of the vessels and straight into the air sacs, filling his lungs up like a sponge.
3. **The Living Constraint:** The fact that this foam was trapped deep inside the lung tissue—while his "larynx and bronchus clearance is free"—is the exact signature of sustained, traumatic chest compression. If he had died instantly from the head injury, his lungs wouldn't have had the time or active blood circulation to fill with fluid. Instead, he survived the initial blow to the head. He lay there pinned under the snow, unconscious but still alive, with his respiratory system desperately trying to expand his chest against a weight it couldn't lift.
Nikolai wasn't a separate casualty who died a different way; he was under the exact same crushing load as the other ravine victims. The snow compressed his chest just as brutally as it did theirs, trapping the fluid in his lungs and causing the exact same internal asphyxiation.
---
### Part 4: Eliminating the Alternatives (Blasts & Falls)
Everything revolves around this foamy blood and the surrounding landscape architecture. We can confidently eliminate the popular alternative theories using simple physics:
* **Why it wasn't a Blast Wave:** While a blast wave can cause "blast lung" (ruptured alveoli and lung foam), a shockwave powerful enough to snap multiple ribs inside a human torso is a force of catastrophic energy. The ravine is a mile from the tent, so we can rule out the tent being damaged, but there are trees all around the creek. If a blast had occurred here, the frozen forest would have borne the scars. High-velocity blast waves shatter branches, strip needles, and rain twigs down into the snowpack. **Not a single search log, photograph, or diary mentions a debris layer of blasted forest or scorched bark embedded in the snow around the ravine.** The environment was completely structurally intact.
* **Why it wasn't a simple Fall:** The ravine featured a 2 to 3-metre drop onto a rocky creek bed. A fall head-first perfectly explains Nikolai's skull fracture, and slamming into a boulder explains the broken ribs. However, a fall is a single, instantaneous impact. Kinetic energy concentrated on a rock leaves massive external skin bruising, cuts, or lacerations—yet the autopsies explicitly state that Dubinina and Zolotaryov had *no external bruising* over their broken ribs. Furthermore, an impact happens in a fraction of a second. It does not provide the continuous, sustained compression required to keep the lungs locked down while the heart pumps, which is required to churn up that dense, suffocating foam.
---
### Conclusion: Traumatic Asphyxia via Static Loading
When you systematically eliminate the alternatives, you are left with a single, highly plausible mechanical process: **Sustained Mechanical Constraint.**
A heavy, dense mass of wind-packed snow (whether a collapsed snow-cave ceiling or a shearing cornice) settled over the torsos of the ravine victims. Because snow is heavy but soft, it conformed perfectly to the shape of their bodies. It applied a uniform, crushing pressure that didn't break or scrape the skin, but it physically locked the chest wall.
They could exhale, but they could not inhale. Their hearts continued to beat forcefully against this restriction, driving blood into the locked lungs. As they made final, desperate muscular attempts to draw breath against the crushing weight, air was whipped directly into the pooling blood inside the lung tissue—creating the exact "abundance of foamy bloody liquid" detailed in the autopsies.
The physical evidence inside the medical reports points not to military conspiracies or weapons tests, but to a tragic, claustrophobic battle against the weight of the snow itself.
-
I think the “two foams” distinction is a useful way to look at it, but I’d be a little cautious about making it too absolute. The autopsy wording isn’t always precise enough to cleanly separate upper-airway froth from true alveolar flooding with modern forensic confidence, especially after months of snow and water exposure in the ravine. Tropical Casino https://tropical-casino.com/ makes me think of the same problem with game history or session data: a label can look definitive until you realize the underlying record is incomplete or ambiguous. I’d treat the foam distinction as one clue among several, not something that settles the question by itself.
That said, the combination in the ravine group is the key point: severe chest trauma, internal hemorrhage, and signs consistent with breathing/circulation continuing for at least some period after injury. That fits a compression scenario much better than a clean fall or explosion. For me the main unresolved question is still the mechanics: what exact snow/den/cornice configuration could produce that level of localized crushing without leaving more obvious skeletal trauma in all four?
-
To validate the thoracic damage , it stands to reason that a collapse would have pinned the R4 victims exactly as they were found. Can an argument be made that any of them were dug out and turned to ease suffering? Additionally, since the branch mat was not scattered from having a body pulled off, any collapse victims were not at, nor pulled from the mat itself. This points to them being crushed where they were found. Lyuda's posture suggests that she may have been moved and propped up to help her breathe. I would think that if she was tended to, she would not be soaked.
I like the idea that the ravine was located by surface water flowing from the creek. The hikers tunnelled along and to the side of the creek. Once it was sufficiently wide, then branches were brought in and the mat constructed. This also implies the Yuris were deceased and their outerwear taken for use. Again, I like the idea they , the R4 made their snow cave tunnelling not from the top down, but from the side following the stream into the ravine.
If the R4 were cought in a collapse and rescued, perhaps work in the cave was initially done in teams with the R4 either coming or going under the snow, while IRZ were getting more wood, working the fire or attending the dead. When the cave collapsed, IRZ may have excavated the injured and seen to their immediate comfort before making a last ditch bid for the tent and rescue.
For me, the trouble has always been that the story or any version of it is told as a linear sequence of events. This is of course a necessary artifact of language. Too, the cause and effect structure of the organization of events tends to create a mindset which is hard to break. The forum is full of different timelines and sequence all with their supporters and detractors.
Ziljoe again shows exemplary leadership by exploring the factual matter.
-
Thank you Glenn m.
It's a look at the patterns and a cross reference to collated evidence that of 60 years of research of other death's that wouldn't be available in 1959.
Quite how the ravine filled in 1959 with snow is anyone's guess but we have later trips to the ravine that gives us an indication that it fills and snow banks and cornices occur. As a cornice migrates across the ravine it definitely leaves hollow areas or voids.
The Yruis do look if they were unsupervised at some point and perhaps left to try and warm up as other activities took place. This could be the making of a number of snow holes , the den being the first and perhaps a second snow hole being fashioned by the ravine four. Perhaps it collapsed and the two yuris are the only ones that managed to get dug out by Zina , Igor and Rustem .
Given the argument that a snow collapse happened on the ravine four , it might have been too difficult to dig them out but perhaps they tried.
I would suspect two to three snow holes would have been dug as one would just be too big for 9 hikers.
As you suggest , there are many possible variations of the sequence of events at the ravine that are plausible.
I've always kept myself tethered to the amount of snow in the ravine as the potential energy for the fractured ribs. That is just a common sense approach although I venture into other theories.
I have managed to find two incidents of snow collapses of snow holes in training days that ended up with chest injury, I believe from a small mass of snow. One was fractured ribs and damage to the sternum. That for me at least gives evidence to keep the link of the injuries to a snow collapse.
-
The 4 seats on the floor were prepared specifically for the final 4, the others were already dead. They had their clothes, their watches, and the photographs from the scene.
-
According to DyatlovPass.com there are no less than four potential locations for the ravine. I believe that what would be uppermost in the hiker's minds is an effective windbreak. That could be achieved by baffling the wind by trees.. I think the contour of the land for digging would be the next consideration. So, a location with trees blocking the wind and an elevated embankment with the high side sheltered from wind would be my preference. This orientation would allow for the group singly or enmasse to tunnel through snow into the embankment, or cornice while facing into but sheltered under the flow of the wind.
The standard canon in this regard is that what came first was the den, or cavity in the snow bank. Followed by the making of the mat. Arguably the third step would be trips to the cedar for padding the mat with salvaged clothing from the Yuris. So, just how dead does someone have to be before you dig a snow cave for yourself?
I get conflicted by considering how much energy is expended in finding a location, excavating overburden, constructing a seating location weighed against what in energy it is going to take to get back to the tent and home. Surely, if a single person was tasked with this, they would fail. Several people could make the work more efficient, but all pay an energy tax. Who is to say that they hikers all agreed to making a den at all? It seems more sensible than making a dssh a mile uphill to a flattened snow covered tent!
Nobody in their right mind, speaking of construction. is going to do anything on or near running water. The heat from water is negated by cold if one becomes wet. That would be practically unavoidable.
A lateral view of a proposed ravine shows the R4 lying where the snow bank is tapered, rather than being found under the deepest snow cover. The mat is actually under much more overburden than they were.
I am of the opinion the R4 were moving in or out of a tunnel to the mat, exhausted from exertion and exposure. Their construction collapsed on them and they could not move against it. It is unsatisfactory though because if IRZ abandoned them in their time of need, how onerous would that be? Could I even make weak argument that there was no foot trail from cedar to ravine? No.
All this thinking, such as it is is founded on the assumption that any reasonable person(s) would do things the same way. If, however, the eventual truth leads me to think, "Why in the world would they do that?" , then who can figure out insanity?
-
I would suspect two to three snow holes would have been dug as one would just be too big for 9 hikers.
If we have a broader look at the Snow theory, we can note the following.
DPI started on the slope, when a snow slab covered the tent unexpectedly. The hikers were inside, and they had to cut the canvas to get outside. That gave them very good lesson how dangerous deep snow could be. The lesson should have warned them - never again! But just in an hour or so they started to dig even deeper snow in the ravine and build tunnels (or holes) in the depths of snow mass. No surprise, sooner or later their construction collapsed, and they found themselves pressed by heavy snow for the 2nd time, but now the consequences were fatal. Could the experienced hikers be so stupid to repeat their mistake? I do not think so.
But OK, let's assume that the hikers that evening were in a digging mood, and instead of making a bonfire they decided to dig a few snow holes to protect themselves from awful weather conditions. The question is: why did not they start digging much earlier, on the slope? Digging out their tent looks to be easier than digging a few tunnels (or holes) in the ravine. In the ravine they had exactly the same digging tools as on the slope -- their hands. On the slope, they even had better tools - a pair of skis. Also, their march downhill did not add to their strength and ability to dig. If digging out the whole tent was a challenge, they could have attempted to dig out some ammunition and be in much stronger position downhill, with axes, warm clothes, medical pack.
To summarize, the Snow theory sounds weak for me. I cannot imagine natural weather impact that could make the hikers to leave the tent and go away in a dark wilderness.
-
SM, your assessments are good food for thought. Why not fortify thrmselves at the tent as opposed to doing the same with less supp,ies a mile away? The only arguement I can offer is that they actually couldn't dig a cave on the slope. I understand there must have been enough snow to necessitate moving some to level the tent foundation. But, what they had on the slope, even with additional shifted snow may not have been deep enough. My guess is that digging shelter on 1079 is an easy possibility for me, an armchair investigator, but for them? In that situation, other than an immediate retreat, I imagine they would consider patching and re-pitching the tent before digging a cave. I think they couldn't get ahead of the weather. They could have cut up the tent for shawls and sat in a citcle, or made tracks for Boot Rock. If they cut up the tent, then they are done, hike is over.They were warned against the attempt on Ortoten. It was a combination of wanting to be first in winter, not wanting to waste their investments, get their certification and arguably, youthful immortality which spurred them on. Hubris was their undoing. If they succeeded, it would be called bravery instead.
Of all the ideas proposed about them leaving 1079 for the woods, bad weather needs the fewest additional assumptions, I can appreciate the arguement that there could be other causes which do not leave permanent evidence. After all, weather may have blown away the very evidence that the tent blocked and collapsed under.
For me, all I can be certain of is that the Yuris died before anyone else did. I also note that IRZ headed back to the tent by a different trail than their descent.
-
Thank you Senior Maldonado.
I shall try to explain my context to your line of inquiry.
Firstly I am trying to ring fence the injuries and what the scene at the ravine and cedar might indicate. It's mostly based on the reasonable assumption that the hikers were driven out of the tent by something that made the situation at the tent unsafe . This could be some sort of a snow collapse, a wolverine, wind, object in, or from the sky , or a number of other theories.
For the exploration of what may have happened at the ravine , we do not need to overly concern ourselves for the reason for leaving the tent, although it is reasonable to give some thought to the connection.
For me , hypothetically going with some weather reason like a snow collapse , seems the most likely. Although this snow collapse may have been far from deadly it would depend entirely on the perspective of the hikers . If they felt it was dangerous, or more was to come down upon them , then the decision to leave until better conditions came available, then , for me it's in the realms of possibility. Like wise, an object from the sky hissing gas or the foul toxic smell of a wolverine spray and a few other ideas all give the same situation where the hikers can't stay at the tent.
It is now a survival situation against the elements , it is a clock ticking against heat loss , temperature, wind fluctuations and how the group can prevent this heat loss. They are experienced in cold hiking, they will know the challenges , dangers and best procedures and practices.
To dig snow holes , retain heat and get out of poor weather conditions is the standard and basically the only way to survive . There is no lesson as to not digging snow holes, humans build on dangerous land over and over again at tornados still destroy homes , people have car crashes but still go in cars.
It is not a mistake to dig a snow hole , whether the snow was the reason for leaving the tent or a yeti kicking them out, or a stage of an R7 rocket releasing fuel. You are not going to survive a night in light clothing with no blankets and no resources to build a substantial fire. The rule is, dig or make a snow hole.
Your point about them not digging for more resources at the tent is the point , for reasons unknown to us , they couldn't get more equipment to do anything at the tent . They are obviously somewhere in-between a rock and a hard place. The forest offers some potential salvation, that is , lower elevation, natural shelter as opposed to a bare slope ,and options for retaining heat. I am putting forth the argument, as simple as it sounds , they couldn't get or take anything more from the tent. They couldn't dig anything from it. Why do I come to this conclusion? Because it's what the whole picture seems to be telling us .
So back to the ravine and cedar and what that might be telling us. We have flooring made from young branches , this is exactly what you would do and what could be processed with the tools they had . A fire is made from the cedar branches , again , the only dry branches that can be processed with out serious tools .
So, the hypothetical snow hole or holes , or cave/s. To scrape into a snow bank or snowdrift is a lot less work than digging into snow , or mostly. We have the den flooring that is just off to the side of the stream bed , in a convenient flat area .it's exactly where a den flooring would be placed , it can't be anywhere else as the lay of the land dictates it. From the side of that ravine above that den flooring , this is where the snow would build and gather , perhaps by a cornice build up.
The ravine is a natural shelter area , snow drifts there , flooring was there at ground level, as we're the ravine 4 . The autopsy suggests a continued force acted upon their chests and they struggled to breathe against this compressing force .
This is the reason for the thread, to dissect the autopsy and see if modern research and evidence can support a model or at least lay reasonable grounds to find that the ravine four died as a result of a snow collapse at the ravine and not at the tent .
Given the fact they lie under 3-4 meters of snow , are located next to flooring that implies that this den flooring was intended to be used for insulation or a roof , it would seem reasonable to allow ourselves to toy with the idea of a crush. I argue that this is what happened, and I give a reasonable interpretation from the autopsy report that supports this notion.
Please counter argue and find my errors in my poor medical understanding of the autopsy.
-
Please counter argue and find my errors in my poor medical understanding of the autopsy.
Frankly, I see no point in driving any significant conclusions from the autopsy reports that we can see in the case files.
The only forensic medical document that is presented in the case files in its original form and which can be unconditionally referenced is the medical expert’s interrogation on sheets 381–383. All 9 autopsy reports in the case files are not originals, they are re-prints of questionable content. The original reports were required to be printed in Sverdlovsk, at the medical lab, and to be certified with the "round" seal of the lab (a seal of an organization). In other words, issuing authority of autopsy reports should be Sverdlovsk medical lab.
However, as you can see, the first four documents have the seal of Laptev, a part‑time freelance expert from Severouralsk. The 5th document has the N‑240 prison hospital's seal. This is completely unacceptable! Neither Laptev nor N-240 could be issuing authorities for the autopsies. And it happened because the prosecutor’s office would never have been able to get "round" seals from Mr.Ustinov (head of the medical lab) for the re-prints. Ustinov was known to be a very stubborn man; he couldn’t stand being pressed and could press anyone else himself. It was useless for the prosecutor’s office to go to Ustinov for official seals. And for the last four autopsy reports Ivanov didn’t even bother with seals. There was no time for him to go to Ivdel and get the seal of the prison hospital N‑240 for these last re-prints. So the last four reports have no issuing authority at all.
In a nutshell, what is true and what is not in these reports, we can only guess.
-
An incident caused by snow in the valley, or a fall by tourists, doesn't seem sufficient to explain the trauma they suffered. I'm leaning more towards the idea that they were injured in the tent and then moved. A few photos of footprints taken the day the tent was first found, and witness statements, suggest the prints belong to 8 or 9 people. Could someone please explain the motivation behind this? Couldn't it belong to 6 people, for example?
I think a detailed study of the number of prints would shed a lot of light. Regarding Glenn M.'s question, I think the group, after descending the slope, first looked for a natural snow cave to protect the injured from the cold. So, before the fire pit and cedar tree, the hole in the valley was discovered, and the injured were moved there. Because this area was quite low-lying and treeless, a lot of snow accumulated. Due to various snow movements, trees didn't grow properly there. As for the distance between the fire pit and the valley; the cedar tree was higher up. There were probably mature trees nearby as well. Almost no snow accumulated. It provided both firewood and the ideal ground for lighting a fire. After placing 3 or 4 wounded people in the valley, the remaining 5 or 6 would gather wood, light a fire, dig a windbreak pit near the valley, and prepare a mat from branches.
-
Please counter argue and find my errors in my poor medical understanding of the autopsy.
Frankly, I see no point in driving any significant conclusions from the autopsy reports that we can see in the case files.
Absolutely brilliant analysis. You hit the nail on the head. While everyone else is arguing about wind speeds and snow depths, they completely miss an obvious and massive fact that cannot be ignored – this unnumbered criminal case file itself is essentially a crime scene.
And these forensic reports are just the tip of the iceberg. Take, for example, the protocol of inspection of the scene where the bodies were found, the witnesses' names are written with gross errors and distortions. Furthermore, Vladimir Askinadzi himself later directly declared that he never signed anything.
https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-341-343?rbid=17743
These legal anomalies and signs of document forgery serve as irrefutable proof of third-party intervention.
-
And yet in spite of the befuddled paper trail, the findings still support the idea Ziljoe presents. None of the autopsy reports are covering anything up, like blood loss from gunshot wounds that were never reported. In my estimation, they are complete and even opinionated. I think what was done was pretty good for 1959 in a rural location populated by poor tribes and convict camps. Not exactly a garden spot. Then again there is that business of the tissue samples... I recall that once the direction of the tent cuts were figured out, the whole criminal case aspect was flipped. It was then a matter of a natural disaster and there were bodies to bury, others to find.
I have the feeling that the mood was to wind up the process. It had gone a long time. In the great scheme of things, the DPI was small potatoes compared to what was going on then.
-
An incident caused by snow in the valley, or a fall by tourists, doesn't seem sufficient to explain the trauma they suffered. I'm leaning more towards the idea that they were injured in the tent and then moved. A few photos of footprints taken the day the tent was first found, and witness statements, suggest the prints belong to 8 or 9 people. Could someone please explain the motivation behind this? Couldn't it belong to 6 people, for example?
I think a detailed study of the number of prints would shed a lot of light. Regarding Glenn M.'s question, I think the group, after descending the slope, first looked for a natural snow cave to protect the injured from the cold. So, before the fire pit and cedar tree, the hole in the valley was discovered, and the injured were moved there. Because this area was quite low-lying and treeless, a lot of snow accumulated. Due to various snow movements, trees didn't grow properly there. As for the distance between the fire pit and the valley; the cedar tree was higher up. There were probably mature trees nearby as well. Almost no snow accumulated. It provided both firewood and the ideal ground for lighting a fire. After placing 3 or 4 wounded people in the valley, the remaining 5 or 6 would gather wood, light a fire, dig a windbreak pit near the valley, and prepare a mat from branches.
Thank you Osi.
For me , at this moment in time ,i think the injuries to the chest walls and skull are too severe to be able to move the potential injured. It raises another problem for me in consideration to how they removed or dug the injured out , if they were injured at the tent that is. It implies no urgent need to leave the tent and that gives them time to gather more clothing and tools?
There is no question to suspect that a collapse of snow cannot break the ribs and give the injuries that were found. It is a fact that it is a possibility, its just gravity and mass. I would attempt to build a snow shelter every time if I were in their situation. Without tools or clothing , there's just no other option.
Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be any more data available about the foot prints although I came across a good sight yesterday that concentrated on all the statements. I shall try to find it.
-
Please counter argue and find my errors in my poor medical understanding of the autopsy.
Frankly, I see no point in driving any significant conclusions from the autopsy reports that we can see in the case files.
Absolutely brilliant analysis. You hit the nail on the head. While everyone else is arguing about wind speeds and snow depths, they completely miss an obvious and massive fact that cannot be ignored – this unnumbered criminal case file itself is essentially a crime scene.
And these forensic reports are just the tip of the iceberg. Take, for example, the protocol of inspection of the scene where the bodies were found, the witnesses' names are written with gross errors and distortions. Furthermore, Vladimir Askinadzi himself later directly declared that he never signed anything.
https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-341-343?rbid=17743
These legal anomalies and signs of document forgery serve as irrefutable proof of third-party intervention.
This isn't the point of my question unfortunately. If we are to review the case , we must approach it without bias. That's a difficult thing to do.
I think we’re using the word “analysis” differently. Senior’s post is an interpretation of the seal situation, but it isn’t analysis in the strict sense — it doesn’t break the documents down into their physical characteristics or consider alternative explanations.
That’s fine, everyone approaches the case differently, but I’m focusing on the physical evidence itself rather than the administrative anomalies.
The link you supply shows two versions. A typed version, probably for clarity for the case file and what looks like , field notes . We can see the folds in the hand written notes , a slight water mark that bleeds through the two pages and affects the ink. The page with the signature's looks to be the outside of the folding when stored as has the most weathering. This would suggest that the document has travelled and that is most likely from the location at the pass , to the final draft by Ivanov or whoever typed the typed copy. There's nothing exciting in the actual document that even contradicts any of the retelling of how the ravine 4 were found.
Regarding the case files, the seals, signatures, and formatting differences — my understanding is that the case file isn’t a single authored document. It’s an umbrella that contains material from multiple institutions, created at different times, under different circumstances, with different procedures.
Some documents are carbon copies without stamps. Some stamped originals stayed with the issuing institution. Some field notes were written outdoors and later copied. Some statements were taken in Ivdel, others in Sverdlovsk, each using their own boilerplate forms. Autopsies came from different medical facilities with different certification practices. Search protocols were handwritten in the field and later typed up for clarity.
The case file is simply a collection of all these documents — field notes, interviews, autopsies, protocols, memos — gathered from different places, different people, and different workflows. They weren’t produced under a unified “criminal case” mindset, because at the time nobody knew what had happened or whether a crime had even occurred.
So the variation we see isn’t evidence of forgery; it’s just the normal patchwork of a multi‑source Soviet case file.When you look at the case file as a multi‑source archive rather than a single authored document, most of the anomalies make sense without needing to assume anything unusual.
I think we can safely believe the autopsy reports.
So Suri , do you think a snow collapse at the ravine might have caused the injuries we see and are reported?
-
...but I’m focusing on the physical evidence itself rather than the administrative anomalies.
You are focusing on the tail of the snake rather than its head. The "administrative anomalies" you are trying to dismiss are actually the legal framework that defines whether your physical evidence is even real or completely fabricated.
There's nothing exciting in the actual document that even contradicts any of the retelling of how the ravine 4 were found.
Are you seriously not bothered by the fact that Vladimir Askinadzi explicitly stated that he never signed anything? Rain or folding paper doesn't magically spawn a forged signature. But by now, I am quite used to you looking at things completely upside down—for you, black is probably white as well.
...at the time nobody knew what had happened or whether a crime had even occurred.
Those who created the document on February 6th already knew what had happened. And from that forged document, we suddenly have an entire case file that lacks an official registration number.
I think we can safely believe the autopsy reports.
I wouldn't even take the interrogation of the forensic expert Vozrozhdenny seriously. Again, it is riddled with errors. For instance, he was never warned of criminal liability for false testimony. I also seriously doubt that Jr. Counselor of Justice Ivanov wouldn't know the proper spelling of his own title and that he would forget the hyphen. I would even say that the entire document was written by a single hand.
прокурор–криминалист
прокурор криминалист
https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-381-383-ru?rbid=17747
So Suri , do you think a snow collapse at the ravine might have caused the injuries we see and are reported?
To answer your final question. No, a snow collapse cannot cause injuries that were documented in forged, legally invalid papers inside a fake case file.
-
I'm leaning more towards the idea that they were injured in the tent and then moved.
This option is out of the question because, as we know, Zolotaryov had a camera and was actively taking photos.
-
@Suri
If your position is that the entire case file is fabricated, then none of the documents you’re citing — the camera, the tent, the dates, the autopsies, the expert interrogation — can be used to support any theory, including yours.
That’s fine if that’s your view, but it means the discussion can’t move forward on evidence. I’m focusing on the physical findings described consistently across the search reports, photos, and witness accounts, because those remain the same regardless of administrative irregularities.
Since I was trying to find a possible pattern to the cause of the injuries with the data that I understand to be true. Would you now be so kind to present the actual injuries that occured so I could try to determine what might of occured, or perhaps your version of the injuries to the ravine 4 from whatever non-fake documents that you may have found?
-
@Ziljoe
I am not stopping you from holding onto an unnumbered case file. For me, Ivanov's letters are far more valuable—they explicitly state that the truth was concealed. That is enough to understand that the case file without a number—including the final conclusion of the investigation—does not reflect the actual state of affairs.
You can see the contradiction yourself. Zolotaryov's camera is clearly visible in the photograph, while there is no mention of it in the case file. So yes, there are very specific facts that can be relied upon.
Anyone who can decipher Ivanov's letters (after all, they are written in riddles and between the lines) can easily find out what actually happened at the Pass. But everyone has to come to this conclusion on their own—otherwise, they simply won't believe it.
-
Several broadcasts of Malakhov's program, the transcripts of which I prepared in the Media section, suggest that Zolotaryov's camera may have had a tape recorder (dictaphone) or a radio transmitter, like a modern mobile phone. If radio communication was available, such a device could have recorded or retransmitted conversations in which Zolotaryov was present, in which the expedition participants spoke negatively of the Soviet regime or talked about their work in secret military factories.
So, it's entirely possible that Zolotaryov was carrying a radio transmitter or dictaphone disguised as a camera. Therefore, the item was confiscated and not inventoried. The question is how feasible this was possible in technological conditions of 1959 and the possibility of direct radio communication in that remote area.
-
I think the “two foams” distinction is a useful way to look at it, but I’d be a little cautious about making it too absolute. The autopsy wording isn’t always precise enough to cleanly separate upper-airway froth from true alveolar flooding with modern forensic confidence, especially after months of snow and water exposure in the ravine. Tropical Casino https://tropical-casino.com/ makes me think of the same problem with game history or session data: a label can look definitive until you realize the underlying record is incomplete or ambiguous. I’d treat the foam distinction as one clue among several, not something that settles the question by itself.
That said, the combination in the ravine group is the key point: severe chest trauma, internal hemorrhage, and signs consistent with breathing/circulation continuing for at least some period after injury. That fits a compression scenario much better than a clean fall or explosion. For me the main unresolved question is still the mechanics: what exact snow/den/cornice configuration could produce that level of localized crushing without leaving more obvious skeletal trauma in all four?
Thank you , I know it's not perfect but it shows us a slight distinction from the non ravine hikers , when taken in isolation it doesn't say much but combined with the scene that we find and the potential for such an incident, all the components are there.
When you look at the terrain in the ravine — not just in 1959 photos but in modern ones — the way the snow builds is very consistent. The cornices form like a slow‑motion wave crest: they curl over, hollow underneath, and advance while leaving a void behind them. As they grow, they create a natural roof , especially once the overhang meets or partially meets the opposite wall.
You don’t even need a full bridge for a usable shelter. A drift on one side and a cornice on the other gives you a potential two‑metre‑high, two‑metre‑deep snow drift you can scoop into. If you remove too much from the face or the underside of the cornice, the slab above loses support and drops vertically. Wet, compacted snow can reach very high densities, and when it falls straight down into a confined space it produces a localised vertical load, not a uniform collapse.
I'm not sure what skeletal we would expect to find or would be obvious?? If they fell , I would expect broken wrists , collar bones and ankles etc. If they were lying or in some way vertical and the force came from the side ( think of them falling like a tree and feet being the pivot point) , I would expect to see the injuries described in the autopsy. The ground level or stones is the hard point of impact or the solid form that the snow mass forces the bodies against. The pelvis is too strong and there's no femur fractures , tibia/fibula, no humerus/radius/ulna ,clavicle fractures. It would seem that the force can only inflicted a certain way ?.
-
Just a few additional words about the case files -
It is capital to understand that all 9 autopsy reports that we see in the case files are not originals, they are drafts and re-prints. There is a tiny possibility that texts of these reports fully match the originals. But more realistically, Ivanov could have "adjusted” something before putting the reports into the folder, which had no registration number. If that was the case, it was not Ivanov who made the decisions about what needed to be removed from the texts of the original medical records. This is NOT within the purview of the prosecutor’s office at all. These decisions were made by an authorized KGB officer who had been granted the right to decide what constituted a state secret and what did not. Measures to ensure the preservation of state secrets were within the purview of the KGB, not the prosecutor’s office.
The fact that Ivanov spent a lot of time producing the re-prints hints that certain corrections to the autopsy reports were made indeed. It also indicates that Ivanov received "blessing" from the top of his organization to manufacture the case files in the form, which we have found them. This is not normal or "rural" way to create case files at all.
-
Sloppy assassinations covered up by sloppier paperwork is not a great way to hide murder. I thought those people then were supposed to be at least as smart as we are now.
-
One thing that gets missed in every Dyatlov conspiracy theory is the sheer amount of unrestricted access random students, hikers, locals, and volunteers had to everything at the pass. If the KGB were involved, none of that would have been allowed. Cameras, diaries, film rolls, notes, pockets, backpacks — all of it would have been seized immediately. Instead, everything passed from pillar to post.
This is where the gorilla experiment comes in.
The experiment is real, peer‑reviewed, and replicated hundreds of times. It shows that people can miss huge, obvious events when their attention is elsewhere. Human memory is unreliable even under ideal conditions — never mind freezing temperatures, stress, fatigue, and multiple search teams arriving on different days. So of course the case file contains contradictions. That’s normal. It’s exactly what you’d expect. The students and searchers were not trained investigators , they had various duties to carry out , and the main duty was to find the hikers alive , not memorize they layout of everything they saw , and their attention then turned to finding the dead, the logistics of transporting them , building their own camp etc.
What conspiracy theorists miss is that normal human inconsistency is not evidence of manipulation. It’s evidence of human cognition. Witnesses misremember colours in robberies. People fail to notice a gorilla walking through a basketball court. Searchers in 1959 misremember who saw what, when, and in what order. That’s not a cover‑up — that’s psychology.
And this is the key point:
If the KGB were involved, the site would have been locked down tighter than a drum. Civilians would never have handled the cameras, never developed the films, never sorted the diaries, never opened the tent, never moved the bodies, never passed items around, never guessed who owned what. Yet Yudin had to go through the equipment and literally guess which items belonged to which hiker. That alone tells you the investigation was not under state‑secret control.
The search effort was chaotic, open, and civilian‑driven.
That is the opposite of a KGB operation.
If anything was altered, the more likely source is post‑release editorialising by journalists decades later — not KGB officers rewriting rib fractures or lung findings. The physical injuries themselves are not state secrets. There is no reason for a KGB officer to alter medical trauma patterns. The injuries are the most stable part of the record, and they still need a physical explanation.
So when people say the autopsies are “fake,” they create an endless loop.
If the autopsies are fake, then no theory can rely on them — not collapse, not blast wave, not fall, not fight. Yet the same people selectively use those autopsies when they support their preferred theory and dismiss them when they don’t. That contradiction is unavoidable.
The simplest, most grounded interpretation is this:
>The case file is exactly what you’d expect from a rural winter investigation in 1959 — messy, inconsistent, human, and transparent. Not controlled, not polished, not sealed, not rewritten. Just normal people doing their best in difficult conditions.
And because the physical injuries are consistent across photos, terrain, and autopsies, they remain the strongest anchor for understanding what actually happened.
-
The reason I keep returning to the injuries is because they’re the one part of the record that doesn’t depend on memories, interviews, case‑file inconsistencies, or speculation. They’re physical facts. And the pattern across the four ravine hikers is internally consistent no matter what theory someone prefers.
- Dubinina — bilateral inward rib fractures, flail chest, massive internal bleeding, lung flooding.
- Zolotaryov — unilateral rib fractures, internal bleeding, same mechanism but smaller load.
- Thibeaux‑Brignolle — skull compression fracture, partial lung flooding, no rib fractures.
- Kolevatov — no chest trauma, no skull trauma, but trapped and dying from cold and compromised breathing.
This is not a random pattern.
It’s not chaotic.
It’s not inconsistent.
It’s not “mysterious.”
It’s exactly what you’d expect from a localised vertical load — a roof failure where different people receive different loads depending on their position under the slab.
The injuries don’t care about conspiracy theories.
They don’t care about case‑file typing.
They don’t care about witness contradictions.
They don’t care about who handled the cameras.
They’re the anchor.
And the anchor points to a mechanical event, not a political one.
I shall get round to explaining the ravine environment in time with hopefully a terrain model to help with visualisation.
-
Ziljoe, you scored many hits on that response. I too know that memory does not run like video tape. Instead we have snippets of memories, thoughts and feelings. We take cues from our environment, conversation and imagination to make a cohesive narrative. This type of approach is being used by someone here recently who says in effect, take these bits of factoids and hearsay, then read between the lines, stitch them together and all will be revealed. The construct may be logical, but logic and objective truth are not the same.
I notice in the forensic reports that much of the damage reported to the hikers is upper torso, particularly head and face, which are of course most exposed to the elements. What we do not read are abdominal injuries, thigh, shin, ankle and foot fractures. As you note pelvic girdles are intact. Your analysis pretty decisively allows for natural conditions to bring about evidence for a tragic but natural occurrence affecting the upper torso.
The Yuris are something to ponder. You would think if anyone was going to get a skull fracture, it would be someone(s) climbing up an icy tree for wood or to get a better look at something.
-
No mention of the mutilations of the 2 bodies in the ravine. Extraordinary injuries, if injury is the correct word to use. And it's highly unlikely that there would have been enough snow at the ravine site to cause certain injuries.
-
An incident caused by snow in the valley, or a fall by tourists, doesn't seem sufficient to explain the trauma they suffered. I'm leaning more towards the idea that they were injured in the tent and then moved. A few photos of footprints taken the day the tent was first found, and witness statements, suggest the prints belong to 8 or 9 people. Could someone please explain the motivation behind this? Couldn't it belong to 6 people, for example?
I think a detailed study of the number of prints would shed a lot of light. Regarding Glenn M.'s question, I think the group, after descending the slope, first looked for a natural snow cave to protect the injured from the cold. So, before the fire pit and cedar tree, the hole in the valley was discovered, and the injured were moved there. Because this area was quite low-lying and treeless, a lot of snow accumulated. Due to various snow movements, trees didn't grow properly there. As for the distance between the fire pit and the valley; the cedar tree was higher up. There were probably mature trees nearby as well. Almost no snow accumulated. It provided both firewood and the ideal ground for lighting a fire. After placing 3 or 4 wounded people in the valley, the remaining 5 or 6 would gather wood, light a fire, dig a windbreak pit near the valley, and prepare a mat from branches.
You are correct about the snow not being a sufficient explanation for the demise of the 9 people. Snow was there, and so were cold and wind, but not enough to cause whatever happened. Also, I still question the footprints near the tent. Apparently, one or more searchers remember seeing very large footprints in that location, but they were never photographed.
-
Just a few additional words about the case files -
It is capital to understand that all 9 autopsy reports that we see in the case files are not originals, they are drafts and re-prints. There is a tiny possibility that texts of these reports fully match the originals. But more realistically, Ivanov could have "adjusted” something before putting the reports into the folder, which had no registration number. If that was the case, it was not Ivanov who made the decisions about what needed to be removed from the texts of the original medical records. This is NOT within the purview of the prosecutor’s office at all. These decisions were made by an authorized KGB officer who had been granted the right to decide what constituted a state secret and what did not. Measures to ensure the preservation of state secrets were within the purview of the KGB, not the prosecutor’s office.
The fact that Ivanov spent a lot of time producing the re-prints hints that certain corrections to the autopsy reports were made indeed. It also indicates that Ivanov received "blessing" from the top of his organization to manufacture the case files in the form, which we have found them. This is not normal or "rural" way to create case files at all.
It's certainly interesting to note that Ivanov said a lot after the collapse of the USSR. And he wasn't the only one. And it's also interesting to note that as the years went by and more and more people were showing an interest in this mystery, the authorities once again stepped in to quiet things down, hence the opening of the case again some years ago that was obviously designed to cover something up.
-
No mention of the mutilations of the 2 bodies in the ravine. Extraordinary injuries, if injury is the correct word to use. And it's highly unlikely that there would have been enough snow at the ravine site to cause certain injuries.
Sarapuk , there is no evidence for mutilations in the autopsy. The ravine four were in that stream bed for 3 months , think about running water over dead flesh .
I want you to think long and hard about the amount of snow in the ravine . It was up to 4 meters in depth, a cubic meter of snow can weigh anything from 50kg to 800kg . Settled snow can weigh from 200-400 kg per cubic meter. The snow in the ravine will have gone through a number of cycles of thawing and freezing, compacting and settling. It will be dence and if for whatever reason , the snow was to give way , we have a substantial mass and energy that could cause the injuries. We have data and examples of these types of injuries sustained in snow collapses.
I'm working from a model with information that we have, look at the photos of the ravine . If you can't put evidence forward , for or against , please don't throw in random comments of large footprints or UFO's. It's getting tedious for me to be honest. I've read many books on UFOs over 40 years and there's been no evidence other than people saying there is evidence. There's a recent book been launched by some UK judge or lawyer this week. Go and research that and stick it in you thread you started about ufos,. I'm sure it will be interesting for those that come here for that information, they deserve your input.
-
What comes to mind is one of those gun or sword shows making the rounds on TV where a human torso made of an artificial skeleton and ballistic gel and a bag of red punch gets put to some sort of gruesome test.
I believe you can see where I am going with this. I am surprised that nobody with an interest and resources has not performed an actual snow crush test.
In lieu of an actual test, perhaps an AI model could be made. The advantage there is the male and female body densities as well as the densities and fall of compacted snow could all be analysed. From those experimental results we could go back to the DPI and compare findings. It would be a graph makers dream come true.
-
Glennm. I was thinking of getting a sheep or animal to test the breaking of the ribs myself but it might be a bit logistically difficult, plus the police might ask what the hell I'm doing. It would be a good one for the "myth busters" . It should be reasonable easy for someone to simulate who has the resources. I have indulged with some of these video's on u tube.
I found two reports of similar incidents.
1. The Mountaineers Training Cave Collapse (Washington, USA)The Case: An alpine safety log detailing a structural failure during an overnight wilderness training field trip.
The Source: The Mountaineers: Structural Engineering Failure! Safety Report
The Incident: Students excavated a large snow cave (10 ft by 7 ft) in heavy, dense snow conditions. Due to temperature fluctuations near freezing, the structural ceiling lost its stability and suffered a sudden, catastrophic engineering failure. The ceiling dropped as a single, consolidated block of dense snow directly onto the students inside, burying them completely.The Injury Profile: One student suffered severe internal thoracic trauma. A medical examination revealed that the heavy weight had caused a flail-type chest injury with torn and severely strained costal cartilage directly connecting the ribs to the sternum.
The Forensic Takeaway: The heavy snow acted like a hydraulic press. Because the massive weight was perfectly distributed across the surface area of the torso, it inflicted severe internal skeletal and cartilage trauma without causing localized impact bruises or breaking the skin. This mirrors the internal trauma found during the autopsies of Dubinina and Zolotaryov.
The Rescue Window: It took nearby teammates exactly 1 to 2 minutes of frantic, panic-driven shovel work to uncover the victims' faces so they could breathe.
2. The Arctic Survival Challenge Cave-In (Arctic Wilderness)
The Case: A documented survival incident involving a massive snow hole collapse during an extreme wilderness challenge.
The Source: Times of Malta: Buried under the snow for three terrifying minutesThe Incident: Miriam Gauci (47) was inside a large snow den designed to shelter 20 people when she heard a "horrible thundering noise." The ice structure sheared off, instantaneously burying her under one metre of compact, sintered snow.
The Rescue Window: Even with an organized survival team standing right outside the shelter, it took exactly 3 minutes to conduct a headcount, realize she was missing, locate her position, and dig her out. Because she was buried in heavy, packed snow, the team couldn't risk swinging sharp spades near her head, severely delaying the excavation.
The Forensic Takeaway: This case highlights the brutal reality of the asphyxiation window. If a person is pinned under heavy, compact snow, they are completely immobilized and face asphyxiation or fatal chest compression within minutes. In the pitch-black darkness of the Siberian night, under 2 to 4 metres of dense snow in a ravine, a 3-minute survival window means certain death before the remaining Dyatlov hikers could physically locate and excavate them.
Times of Malta
Buried under the snow for three terrifying minutes
A mother on a survival challenge in the Arctic wilderness had a lucky escape last week when a snow-hole she was digging suddenly caved in, leaving her trapped under one metre of compact snow. Miriam Gauci, 47, was tunnelling inside the snow hole with...
A mother on a survival challenge in the Arctic wilderness had a lucky escape last week when a snow-hole she was digging suddenly caved in, leaving her trapped under one metre of compact snow.
Miriam Gauci, 47, was tunnelling inside the snow hole with an ice axe to carefully carve a domed ceiling, when it gave way.
Ms Gauci said she could still hear the horrible noise the ice structure, which was to fit 20 people for the night, made when it came crashing down on her.
“There was this horrible loud noise, and suddenly I was in a lot of pain. I was trapped under one metre of heavy, compact snow. I couldn’t move,” she told The Sunday Times.
Her saving grace came in the way she fell: “There was an air pocket by the side of my face. At least I could breathe… and scream. I screamed my head off, really.”
Outside, no one heard her cries, but after a snap headcount, fellow participants realised Ms Gauci was trapped and began a frantic search for her, some even shovelling the snow with their bare hands.
Winston Pirotta, 37, another challenge participant, had got out of the snow-hole a minute earlier: “I had just finished my carving shift and was making my way towards the fire to warm up, when I heard a thundering noise and cries of ‘Collapse! Collapse!’ we all rushed, in shock, on site.
Even now, when, I recall the accident I still get a cold sweat.”
David Schembri, 24, part of the expedition team, was at the other entrance of the snow hole when the accident happened: “I think for the first 15 seconds we were shocked to the roots. Those seconds felt like an hour – but then we quickly gathered our wits and took on rescue roles.”
Apart from Ms Gauci, there were two other people in the snow hole: Maria Vella Galea was literally blasted out of the tunnel and on impact hurt her face.
Martin Farrugia was closer to the entrance and only his legs were trapped.
Although they roughly knew Ms Gauci’s location, the rescuers couldn’t use spades for fear of hurting her. In total, she was trapped under the snow for about three minutes.
“They lasted an eternity, but I was convinced I would get out of there,” she said.
The minute they got her out, she was whisked away in a stretcher to the expedition cabin, and placed in front of a fire to warm up, preventing the onset of hypothermia.
She was seen by a paramedic and two doctors on the team and then a taxi ambulance took her to hospital, an hour away.
Ms Gauci got away with bruised and fractured ribs, and got the all-clear to return to the expedition: “My time was not yet up, I guess. My guardian angel was really by my side.”
The reason for the collapse is still unclear, for only a few hours earlier, 20 of them had been jumping up and down on the snow structure to make it more compact.
-
No mention of the mutilations of the 2 bodies in the ravine. Extraordinary injuries, if injury is the correct word to use. And it's highly unlikely that there would have been enough snow at the ravine site to cause certain injuries.
Sarapuk , there is no evidence for mutilations in the autopsy. The ravine four were in that stream bed for 3 months , think about running water over dead flesh .
I want you to think long and hard about the amount of snow in the ravine . It was up to 4 meters in depth, a cubic meter of snow can weigh anything from 50kg to 800kg . Settled snow can weigh from 200-400 kg per cubic meter. The snow in the ravine will have gone through a number of cycles of thawing and freezing, compacting and settling. It will be dence and if for whatever reason , the snow was to give way , we have a substantial mass and energy that could cause the injuries. We have data and examples of these types of injuries sustained in snow collapses.
I'm working from a model with information that we have, look at the photos of the ravine . If you can't put evidence forward , for or against , please don't throw in random comments of large footprints or UFO's. It's getting tedious for me to be honest. I've read many books on UFOs over 40 years and there's been no evidence other than people saying there is evidence. There's a recent book been launched by some UK judge or lawyer this week. Go and research that and stick it in you thread you started about ufos,. I'm sure it will be interesting for those that come here for that information, they deserve your input.
Investigators should keep an open mind and not dismiss anything. Open for the unexpected and revelations. I've gone into some detail early on in this Forum on certain injuries to Lyudmila. And snow doesn't figure in my findings. But animal type mutilations do, the sort of mutilations that are happening around the World.
-
What comes to mind is one of those gun or sword shows making the rounds on TV where a human torso made of an artificial skeleton and ballistic gel and a bag of red punch gets put to some sort of gruesome test.
I believe you can see where I am going with this. I am surprised that nobody with an interest and resources has not performed an actual snow crush test.
In lieu of an actual test, perhaps an AI model could be made. The advantage there is the male and female body densities as well as the densities and fall of compacted snow could all be analysed. From those experimental results we could go back to the DPI and compare findings. It would be a graph makers dream come true.
I think you would find that such a test would fail to prove that snow was responsible.
-
I think you would find that such a test would fail to prove that snow was responsible.
That's the point of a test.....
-
Investigators should keep an open mind and not dismiss anything. Open for the unexpected and revelations. I've gone into some detail early on in this Forum on certain injuries to Lyudmila. And snow doesn't figure in my findings. But animal type mutilations do, the sort of mutilations that are happening around the World.
Sarapuk , it's a proof of concept. No one's dismissing anything. Of course one should keep an open mind , but part of keeping an open mind is the bit where we must consider the incident might be quite mundane.
We must consider that their are no animal mutilations that are happening around the world. You are repeating every UFO story from around the world , "there's evidence, because , Bob that works for the CIA , said Steve from the FBI said there's evidence ".
I'm not interested in your findings as I don't even know what they are , you have supplied no evidence and saying you have gone into some detail early on ,is not evidence of anything.
The point of this thread is to evidence, explore or conclude that a drop of snow falling from height X, can or cannot fracture ribs and fracture a skull.
From this we can work from the alleged autopsies
And work from process of elimination. It's a win win. If it can't happen you get to keep your UFO and we move on.
-
Yes, it is plausible to view the collapse of the snow roof as the most logical cause of the trauma sustained by Lyudmila and Zolotaryov. However, the differences in the injuries among the four individuals within that 2-square-meter area do not, in my view, rule out the possibility that the incident occurred outside. Considering the nature of Lyudmila and Semyon's injuries—and the fact that Thibeaux and Alexander suffered head and neck trauma while showing no signs of chest trauma—the situation raises questions. If I am to lean toward the theory Ziljoe advocates—that a snow roof collapse caused these injuries—I need to convince myself of how that could have happened. This snow cave was situated just above the ravine bed on a slope with a 10-degree incline. Lyudmila and Semyon were resting at the lowest point of the slope, followed by Thibeaux, and then Alexander near the cave entrance. The roof collapsed in the direction of the slope, inflicting the most severe damage on Lyudmila and Semyon. Based on the principles of mass and gravity, I am visualizing the sequence of events; Alexander must have been subjected to very little of the collapse's force.
-
Osi, I for one appreciate your thoughtful reply to Ziljoes post. It seems to be the fashion lately in the forum for anyone who posts an idea to suffer the slings and arrows of speculative critics who, like school aged kids are more adept at being critical than the opposite.
I have suggested that if the situation in the ravine could be modeled in the material world, or simulated in the digital domain. We could collectively rule in or out the most probable or unlikely explanations.
Although there were discrepancies as to where the ravine actually was, I believe the matter is settled. It would be excellent if any of the expeditions actually mapped the dimensions.
-
For those who lean towards a snow collapse at the ravine, I am curious how do you understand Lyuda's physical position? She is on her knees, with her arms up. I would think a strong snow collapse would, at the very least, knock her off her knees and bring her arms down, before compressing and crushing her ribs. I can't reconcile her death position with a snow collapse.
(https://i.ibb.co/j9XW6R49/Screenshot-2026-09-12-at-6-02-24-AM.png) (https://imgbb.com/)
-
A fair observation amashilu. It is one that I have pondered under every theory . Every theory struggles to put forward an explanation as to her body position. It's the same problem if it was murder , a blast wave , staging , a yeti , UFO's etc.
Although all the above can be argued that they were placed there, then the same argument can be said that she was dug out from a snow collapse . I agree with you that I can't quite see her being entombed in that position from a vertical collapse . So I'm not ignoring that .
I am aware that the reports of her lower leg being covered in a sleeve of a jumper as a makeshift sock or shoe ties in with the other half of that jumper being found at the cedar or on the path to the den flooring . That in its self suggests there had been time to do that action without interruption from fighting or fleeing something . It is an act of repurposing a resource in a situation where it gives a potential for combating the threat of the cold ,as is the fire , the den flooring and it's ideal location for the for a snow cave.
If we look at what we don't see at the cedar and the den , we see no weapons are made, sticks are not used as makeshift spears , they are used as flooring, the fire is not used to carry torches or fire sticks to keep beasts or monsters away .
Every action we see at the ravine and cedar alludes to a proactive combined effort to fight the environment and combat heat loss. It does not suggest internal conflict and the time it would take to do all these actions implies they were not being stopped or restricted from doing them.
To stop , remove a jumper , cut or rip it in half , proceed to don it and secure to the limb means they had time without threat. It is a detail that I would say is beyond the imagination of any staging or outsiders.
This brings me back to the details of the autopsy, if they were faked in some way , there still seems to be an element of detail in the reports that ties in with what we would expect to see in a compression injury.
That raises a question , if they are fake, why draft a autopsy report that basically fits perfectly with a snow collapse. I doubt that someone would mange to fake that detail as the knowledge to link a compression injury might not have been available in 1959.
It is the foam , internal bleeding , and the ruptured ventricle that imply the struggle to breathe whilst alive . If we remove the skull fracture and broken ribs for the minute and compare the ravine 4 autopsies with the other 5 autopsies . 3 of the ravine 4 have the restricted breathing , it means as they died , there was a load on them stopping them from breathing . They died in a different way to the other hypothermic hikers.
So , let's add the other findings , broken ribs , burst artery ( the weak part from pressure) , fractured skull, no bruising to the area of the chest . Then let's look at the location, ground level , stoney ground , under 3 meters of snow.
We also know that the ravine and the other ravines gather snow and cornices form and fill with snow.
So let's flip other possibilities of the snow level in the ravine on the night of the 1st of February 59. Is it possible that the ravine only had 30 cm of snow in it after at least 2-3 months of winter snow before February the 1st ?.
-
Yes, this is possible—in fact, there was even more fresh snow: large-flaked snow that fell on February 1st and 2nd. The group members waited for the snowfall to cease, but when it did not, they set out from the cache, albeit late. They realized they would be unable to move through the forest in the fresh snow. I can list the most compelling reasons for this view as follows: the tracks between the cache and the tent had completely vanished; they departed the cache late (despite the short distance between the cache and the tent); and the period immediately following fresh snowfall is the prime time for avalanches and slab slides to occur.
-
Even if someone believes that nearly every detail fits with a snow collapse at the ravine, if one detail is as impossible as Lyuda being crushed and killed by heavy snow without falling off her knees or bringing her arms down, then the scenario cannot work. We must find a different scenario, maybe including a snow collapse, but Lyuda isn't affected by it? How might that happen? It has been noted that several of the bodies, for example Igor, Yuri K, Yuri D, and Lyuda, show signs of having been moved after death. So now there is a snow collapse, but Lyuda was somewhere else when she died and someone moved her. We should try to explain that and see where we get.
-
I think we’re all circling around the same core issue from different angles, so let me try to frame this in a way that respects everyone’s position.
Osi’s point about fresh snowfall is fair, and I agree that Feb 1–2 brought new instability to the slope. But fresh snow doesn’t erase the baseline accumulation that had already built up through December and January. Dyatlov’s own diary mentions 1.5 metres of snow in the forest the day before — and that’s in sheltered terrain. Ravines are catchment zones. They collect drift and snow transported from the hilltops, and this is what builds the drifts and mini‑cornices. The ravine fills over the whole winter, and I would argue it was deeper than the 30 cm reported depth of the den flooring.
Even if the Feb 1–2 snowfall was heavy, it was adding to what was already there.
And we have a physical clue that’s hard to ignore:
If the snow was deeper than 30 cm, the den flooring had to be carved sideways, not downward. It had to be scooped from a snow bank or drift. With no shovels, branches and hands can only scoop horizontally. That means the snow depth at the ravine was already high enough to carve into, not shallow enough to sit on bare ground. There would be little advantage in sitting in an empty ravine to retain heat. Whatever the exact number, the scene implies the snow was deep enough to support a collapse mechanism.
On Lyuda’s posture — I agree it’s unusual, and every theory struggles with it. But her final position is not automatically the position she died in. Snow settling, melt, partial excavation, and the fact she was dug out all affect posture. So I don’t think her pose alone can veto the entire scenario, especially when the injury pattern (foam, hemothorax, ventricle rupture, bilateral rib fractures without external bruising) is so strongly aligned with compression.
If we want to explore alternatives, I’m happy to — but I am trying to anchor them in the physical reality of the terrain. The ravine was unlikely to be an empty trench on Feb 1. It was a natural snow‑catchment that had been accumulating for months, and the den flooring suggests the hikers were working into that snow, not on top of a thin layer.
-
Ziljoe, I agree with you. From my perspective, the situation on the ground was undeniable: due to the precipitation in December and January, snowdrifts had formed around Kholat that grew deeper as one descended from the summit. While the depth of the wind-blown snow—before it hardened—was around one meter at higher elevations, drifts reaching nearly three to four meters had accumulated just a mile down the slope. Due to the density of the cedar trees, while there might be only 30 cm of snow in one spot, snow mounds of three to four meters could form in the brushy creek bed just 50 meters below. On Kholat, there was a one-meter layer of snow that had fallen months earlier and, through erosion and compaction, had turned into a sheet of ice. It would have been impossible for them to dig through this hard snow to level the ground for their tent. Instead, they cleared a space by cutting into the 50 or 60 cm of fresh snow that had fallen during calm weather around February 1st. They likely paused there, lulled into a false sense of security by the mild conditions; no one would have wanted to camp on that windy peak. It was snowing, yet the air was perfectly still. It was the melting snow of May that separated Lyuda from the other three and swept her further down the slope.
-
from ziljoe
On Lyuda’s posture — I agree it’s unusual, and every theory struggles with it. But her final position is not automatically the position she died in.
Explain.
Do you mean something like, after she died, someone came along and put her on the rock ledge, bending her knees and moving her arms and hands?
-
No, I’m not suggesting anyone arranged her body. I’m saying her final position isn’t automatically the position she died in, although there are physical explanations for how it could have changed.
Snowpack mechanics can shift limbs after death: settling, melt‑movement, partial burial, and the excavation process all alter arm, leg, and torso orientation. It’s also possible the surviving hikers at the ravine tried to dig her out before they succumbed, or realised it was futile to reach the others. Any of that would disturb limb position without any intention to “pose” her.
Between deep unstable snow, later melt, and the digging required to reach her, those processes could easily cause changes. For example, I doubt the rock she is leaning on was bare at the time — there may have been snow beneath her that later thawed and was carried away by meltwater, leaving her in a different final posture than the one she died in.
-
Amashilu, thag is exactly what I think. She was in respiratory distress and she was helped up on the ledge and made comfortable. My guess is the water was not flowing nore than a trickle, if that. In my imagining IRZ propped her up before they left for the tent.
-
Even if someone believes that nearly every detail fits with a snow collapse at the ravine, if one detail is as impossible as Lyuda being crushed and killed by heavy snow without falling off her knees or bringing her arms down, then the scenario cannot work. We must find a different scenario, maybe including a snow collapse, but Lyuda isn't affected by it? How might that happen? It has been noted that several of the bodies, for example Igor, Yuri K, Yuri D, and Lyuda, show signs of having been moved after death. So now there is a snow collapse, but Lyuda was somewhere else when she died and someone moved her. We should try to explain that and see where we get.
Lynda is in the ravine and suffers from the same crush injuries that the autopsy implies , I would not say we have to say the scenario can not work because of the way she is lying . It may just not be obvious. The scenario is still plausible.
It is assumed by some that the bodies were moved because of the blood pooling not reflecting the lay of the bodies. However , all is not straight forward in the chemical process of how the blood pooling occurs.
When the Dyatlov hikers died, the temperatures were far below freezing. Their bodies probably froze before rigor mortis and livor mortis (blood pooling) could fully develop. Freezing interrupts both processes — it stops the chemical rigor cascade and prevents normal blood settling.
Weeks later, when the bodies were recovered, they were still frozen. To perform an autopsy and remove clothing, the mortuary staff had to thaw the bodies to some degree. You cannot autopsy a rock‑hard frozen corpse.
What likely occurred is thawing allowed delayed rigor mortis to activate and allowed some blood to become fluid again, producing partial, patchy, inconsistent hypostasis. This is exactly what forensic pathology expects in previously frozen bodies: lividity becomes faint, unreliable, and easily misinterpreted.
The autopsy doctors did not report any contradiction between lividity and posture. They saw normal cold‑weather hypostasis. The “blood pooling problem”
In normal conditions, livor mortis begins first and rigor mortis begins later. But in Dyatlov, both processes were interrupted by freezing. The bodies froze before lividity or rigor could develop. When thawed for autopsy, the blood became liquid again and pooled according to the table position, and rigor mortis finally activated and resolved.
-
Amashilu, thag is exactly what I think. She was in respiratory distress and she was helped up on the ledge and made comfortable. My guess is the water was not flowing nore than a trickle, if that. In my imagining IRZ propped her up before they left for the tent.
Do you support the snow collapse theory then? I am trying to put all these pieces together. Let's say you are right, the other hikers found Lyuda in the ravine in respiratory distress (from what cause?) and they repositioned her. She died only 10+/- minutes later in this position. The autopsy shows that she died from one of the broken ribs piercing her heart. Then later, the snow collapse happened, compressing and crushing her ribs? But she was already dead, right? and her ribs were already broken.
-
Lynda is in the ravine and suffers from the same crush injuries that the autopsy implies , I would not say we have to say the scenario can not work because of the way she is lying . It may just not be obvious. The scenario is still plausible.
It is assumed by some that the bodies were moved because of the blood pooling not reflecting the lay of the bodies. However , all is not straight forward in the chemical process of how the blood pooling occurs.
When the Dyatlov hikers died, the temperatures were far below freezing. Their bodies probably froze before rigor mortis and livor mortis (blood pooling) could fully develop. Freezing interrupts both processes — it stops the chemical rigor cascade and prevents normal blood settling.
Weeks later, when the bodies were recovered, they were still frozen. To perform an autopsy and remove clothing, the mortuary staff had to thaw the bodies to some degree. You cannot autopsy a rock‑hard frozen corpse.
What likely occurred is thawing allowed delayed rigor mortis to activate and allowed some blood to become fluid again, producing partial, patchy, inconsistent hypostasis. This is exactly what forensic pathology expects in previously frozen bodies: lividity becomes faint, unreliable, and easily misinterpreted.
The autopsy doctors did not report any contradiction between lividity and posture. They saw normal cold‑weather hypostasis. The “blood pooling problem”
In normal conditions, livor mortis begins first and rigor mortis begins later. But in Dyatlov, both processes were interrupted by freezing. The bodies froze before lividity or rigor could develop. When thawed for autopsy, the blood became liquid again and pooled according to the table position, and rigor mortis finally activated and resolved.
Yes, but I'm not addressing the livor mortis question here. I'm talking about her position.
I think there are many things about Lyuda that suggest she is the key to the answer of this mystery.
-
I have previously thought Lyuda may have slid down or been helped up to her final pose. Her position suggests that she was exhausted. Was it more comfortable to lie like this, head up as opposed to laying on the branch mat and stretching out? I think sleep either way is a death sentence, so kneeling would be preferable to lying. No doubt her previous exertions starting with the march to the Feb 1 camp, making camp, retreating from it and all the activity in the woods were exhausting. The effort and crippling cold sapped her strength. I can not rule out shock if she witnessed the demise of the Yuris.
A snow cave collapse explains much, simply and efficiently. Alternately, if what happened to the Yuris also affected Lyuda at the same time and place could it be that she was injured at the cedar and moved to the ravine? In this case, she was sheltered from wind, elevated, made comfortable and nursed until she expired. Unlike the guys, she was not undressed, but perhaps packed in snow right and left in order to preserve her dignity. Later the weather covered her over. On the other hand if she was caught in a cornice collapse, she would be buried. Salvaging her garments may not have been possible.
I think about an imaginary hiker being found iburied jn snow. If an investigation tries to uncover the cause of death based on the final pose and the fact that others dug down to find him, it completely ignores the the dynamics of the avalanche that put him there if those traces were smoothed out over time. The cause of death may be more readily determined than the circumstance of death.
It would seem that Lyura was crushed, in place, at the mouth of a tunnel leading to a branch mat in a deep ravine. She could have been moved.
-
Yes, but I'm not addressing the livor mortis question here. I'm talking about her position.
I think there are many things about Lyuda that suggest she is the key to the answer of this mystery.
The back‑pressure model isn’t speculation — it’s exactly what blunt chest compression does. The autopsy shows internal cardiac hemorrhage, not a penetrating injury. If a rib had pierced the heart, the report would describe a perforation or rupture of the myocardium, but it doesn’t. The foam deep in the lungs proves she was alive under sustained compression, which is consistent with hydraulic back‑pressure and capillary rupture, not instant death from a stab‑type injury. It leans towards traumatic asphyxiation. It's why I'm pointing at the autopsies, the mass of snow and the hard ground surface. The autopsies match the post injury environment.
It's difficult for me to understand the medical terminology but the autopsies don't imply anything else outside of what we find in the ravine. ?
-
Investigators should keep an open mind and not dismiss anything. Open for the unexpected and revelations. I've gone into some detail early on in this Forum on certain injuries to Lyudmila. And snow doesn't figure in my findings. But animal type mutilations do, the sort of mutilations that are happening around the World.
Sarapuk , it's a proof of concept. No one's dismissing anything. Of course one should keep an open mind , but part of keeping an open mind is the bit where we must consider the incident might be quite mundane.
We must consider that their are no animal mutilations that are happening around the world. You are repeating every UFO story from around the world , "there's evidence, because , Bob that works for the CIA , said Steve from the FBI said there's evidence ".
I'm not interested in your findings as I don't even know what they are , you have supplied no evidence and saying you have gone into some detail early on ,is not evidence of anything.
The point of this thread is to evidence, explore or conclude that a drop of snow falling from height X, can or cannot fracture ribs and fracture a skull.
From this we can work from the alleged autopsies
And work from process of elimination. It's a win win. If it can't happen you get to keep your UFO and we move on.
Well I find it a bit strange that you say that we must consider that animal mutilations are not happening. There is plenty of evidence that animal mutilations are real and of an unknown force. And do I really have to dig out what Ive said early on, ie, years ago on this Forum ?
-
Yes, it is plausible to view the collapse of the snow roof as the most logical cause of the trauma sustained by Lyudmila and Zolotaryov. However, the differences in the injuries among the four individuals within that 2-square-meter area do not, in my view, rule out the possibility that the incident occurred outside. Considering the nature of Lyudmila and Semyon's injuries—and the fact that Thibeaux and Alexander suffered head and neck trauma while showing no signs of chest trauma—the situation raises questions. If I am to lean toward the theory Ziljoe advocates—that a snow roof collapse caused these injuries—I need to convince myself of how that could have happened. This snow cave was situated just above the ravine bed on a slope with a 10-degree incline. Lyudmila and Semyon were resting at the lowest point of the slope, followed by Thibeaux, and then Alexander near the cave entrance. The roof collapsed in the direction of the slope, inflicting the most severe damage on Lyudmila and Semyon. Based on the principles of mass and gravity, I am visualizing the sequence of events; Alexander must have been subjected to very little of the collapse's force.
Maybe the 2 bodies with the mutilation type injuries were put there or dropped there. ie, nothing to do with any collapsing of snow.
-
Lynda is in the ravine and suffers from the same crush injuries that the autopsy implies , I would not say we have to say the scenario can not work because of the way she is lying . It may just not be obvious. The scenario is still plausible.
It is assumed by some that the bodies were moved because of the blood pooling not reflecting the lay of the bodies. However , all is not straight forward in the chemical process of how the blood pooling occurs.
When the Dyatlov hikers died, the temperatures were far below freezing. Their bodies probably froze before rigor mortis and livor mortis (blood pooling) could fully develop. Freezing interrupts both processes — it stops the chemical rigor cascade and prevents normal blood settling.
Weeks later, when the bodies were recovered, they were still frozen. To perform an autopsy and remove clothing, the mortuary staff had to thaw the bodies to some degree. You cannot autopsy a rock‑hard frozen corpse.
What likely occurred is thawing allowed delayed rigor mortis to activate and allowed some blood to become fluid again, producing partial, patchy, inconsistent hypostasis. This is exactly what forensic pathology expects in previously frozen bodies: lividity becomes faint, unreliable, and easily misinterpreted.
The autopsy doctors did not report any contradiction between lividity and posture. They saw normal cold‑weather hypostasis. The “blood pooling problem”
In normal conditions, livor mortis begins first and rigor mortis begins later. But in Dyatlov, both processes were interrupted by freezing. The bodies froze before lividity or rigor could develop. When thawed for autopsy, the blood became liquid again and pooled according to the table position, and rigor mortis finally activated and resolved.
Yes, but I'm not addressing the livor mortis question here. I'm talking about her position.
I think there are many things about Lyuda that suggest she is the key to the answer of this mystery.
You are on the right track. Lyudmila is a key part in this mystery. I did a lot of figuring out some years ago now on this Forum re some of her internal injuries, which are not consistent with any type of snow crushing.
-
I believe that animals degrading the corpse of any of the R4 is worth considering. However, in a broader picture, all the rest of the deceased were much more exposed and accessible to scavengers. As such I have a problem supporting the idea that a scavenger would burrow to eat if food was readily available at ground level.
We must take into consideration a roll call of those predatory creatures. Quadrapeds like Fox, badger, wolf and wolverine would conceivably leave prints as well as spoor. A raven, crow or some raptor would not leave prints, but they are not equipped to dig. Pulling and tearing are more to their way of eating.
I completely rule out canabalisn, trophy taking and LGM as having any merit in this discussion.
In any circumstance an argument for mutilation of a corpse implies that the corpse exists before mutilation. Mutilation is not the cause of death. But a consequence. Therefore, the whole topic is a misdirection and gets us no closer to understanding the why or the how of the case.
-
I believe that animals degrading the corpse of any of the R4 is worth considering. However, in a broader picture, all the rest of the deceased were much more exposed and accessible to scavengers. As such I have a problem supporting the idea that a scavenger would burrow to eat if food was readily available at ground level.
We must take into consideration a roll call of those predatory creatures. Quadrapeds like Fox, badger, wolf and wolverine would conceivably leave prints as well as spoor. A raven, crow or some raptor would not leave prints, but they are not equipped to dig. Pulling and tearing are more to their way of eating.
I completely rule out canabalisn, trophy taking and LGM as having any merit in this discussion.
In any circumstance an argument for mutilation of a corpse implies that the corpse exists before mutilation. Mutilation is not the cause of death. But a consequence. Therefore, the whole topic is a misdirection and gets us no closer to understanding the why or the how of the case.
Strange thing to say that the mutilation of a corpse implies that the corpse exists before mutilation! And then you say that mutilation is not the cause of death but a consequence! And then that the whole topic is a misdirection! And you do not explain your reasoning, if that's what we should call it. Anyway, it should be obvious even to non-medical people that a serious mutilation can be the cause of death.
-
Well I find it a bit strange that you say that we must consider that animal mutilations are not happening. There is plenty of evidence that animal mutilations are real and of an unknown force. And do I really have to dig out what Ive said early on, ie, years ago on this Forum ?
Sarapuk.
There's no evidence Sarapuk. Stop believing the junk TV.
The thread is about the physics and possibility of a snow collapse and if what was reported and found matches a hypothetical possibility. By all means I welcome you to say it couldn't happen because the laws of physics don't allow it or something that i might be missing.
Repeating animal mutilations are the cause does not counter the argument for a snow collapse. It does not explain the autopsies or injuries. Please take your UFOs and build your case in the thread you started and supply your evidence there.
I honestly don't want to read what you said years ago. I actually remember your rudeness to me when I first joined.
-
Well I find it a bit strange that you say that we must consider that animal mutilations are not happening. There is plenty of evidence that animal mutilations are real and of an unknown force. And do I really have to dig out what Ive said early on, ie, years ago on this Forum ?
Sarapuk.
There's no evidence Sarapuk. Stop believing the junk TV.
The thread is about the physics and possibility of a snow collapse and if what was reported and found matches a hypothetical possibility. By all means I welcome you to say it couldn't happen because the laws of physics don't allow it or something that i might be missing.
Repeating animal mutilations are the cause does not counter the argument for a snow collapse. It does not explain the autopsies or injuries. Please take your UFOs and build your case in the thread you started and supply your evidence there.
I honestly don't want to read what you said years ago. I actually remember your rudeness to me when I first joined.
Sounds like you are the one being rude. Why. Am I hitting a raw nerve? Saying something that may be the cause of what actually happened. Or something that contributed to what actually happened. I'm merely saying that it's highly unlikely that snow played a big part in this mystery. And how much time do you want to spend on this snow thing?
-
Sounds like you are the one being rude. Why. Am I hitting a raw nerve? Saying something that may be the cause of what actually happened. Or something that contributed to what actually happened. I'm merely saying that it's highly unlikely that snow played a big part in this mystery. And how much time do you want to spend on this snow thing?
You are not hitting a raw nerve ,rather not putting forward a coherent counter argument or physical explanation.
Whether I actually believe in a snow collapse or not is irrelevant. I'm applying the science, the location and mechanical forces that might cause exactly what was found. It is an invite to theorise .
Obviously , I could introduce numerous physical objects or scenarios to the ravine such as a steam roller , clubs, sledge hammers , falling elks etc.
However , I have found myself at a dead end because the noise surrounding the incident has become some what difficult to navigate and wildly speculative . So I have decided to start from the basics and look at things a fresh.
I understand the topic does not interest you and I respect that. I intend to continue presenting a snow collapse model because as I research further and learn , the probability risesin my mind. In the absence of any other theory , I shall continue to endeavour in my pursuit .
Other visitors to the site actually might like reading it and I know you wouldn't try to sabotage a thread out of selfish reasons or stop other people's intrigue.
UFO's and yetis get high views and I think it would be superb if you continued with the thread you started about mutilations.
Snow plays a huge part in this incident one way or another ,I intend to debate it's possible involvement and offer possible physical scenarios. If there is a problem, just skip past.
-
Another point about Lyudmila’s injuries that doesn’t get much attention is the bilateral fracture of the hyoid bone horns. It’s a small detail in the autopsy, but it’s actually one of the most informative injuries in the whole case. The hyoid is buried deep in the throat, protected by the jaw, the tongue base, and thick muscle. It doesn’t break easily, and when it does, it usually tells us something very specific about the forces involved.
Now, because she was in running water for eight weeks, we can’t rely on bruising or soft‑tissue colour to determine peri‑mortem hemorrhage. Water washes out small hemorrhages completely. So the absence of visible bruising doesn’t mean the injury wasn’t peri‑mortem — it just means the soft tissue was too degraded to show it. In cases like this, the bone is the reliable witness.
The important part is the fracture pattern. Breaking both hyoid horns is rare. Manual strangulation usually breaks one side, and it leaves other structural damage in the neck that wasn’t recorded. What does break both horns is forced hyperextension — the kind that happens when the torso is fixed and the head is driven backward under load.
This ties into her chest injuries. Lyudmila had bilateral rib fractures and massive internal bleeding. That kind of chest compression effectively locks the upper torso in place. Once the chest is pinned, the neck becomes the hinge point. If the head is forced backward while the torso can’t move, the suprahyoid and infrahyoid muscles tighten like cables. Under sudden tension, the hyoid horns snap. This exact mechanism is documented in crush‑asphyxia cases, avalanche entrapments, diving accidents, and even in severe hyperextension whiplash ,not the mild kind, but the extreme type where the torso is fixed and the head snaps back.
hyoid fractures can occur in whip lash, but only in the same posture that would occur in a collapse: torso fixed, head forced backward, neck taking the load. It’s the same biomechanics. Interestingly the tongue becomes lose and can protrude.
At discovery her head was flexed forward, resting on her hands, but bodies often shift position after the initial trauma ,during the struggle for air, as muscle tone fades, as snow melts, or simply through decomposition. The injury posture and the final posture don’t have to match.
The chain is;
Chest compression → torso fixed → head driven backward → neck hyperextension → hyoid horns fracture → tongue loses anchoring → exposed soft tissue removed by water.
It’s another mechanical sequence that fits her injuries . It’s also one of the strongest anatomical indicators of further forces sustained by the torso.
-
Ziljoe, I think this observation regarding the hyoid deserves a new thread.mitnwill get buried here and lost.
-
The recommendations of suitable locations to build a snow cave . From the manuals for tourists.
(https://i.ibb.co/SXzHv4P4/Screenshot-20261019-061800-Chrome-2.jpg) (https://ibb.co/kgtzcsxs)
-
I believe these are the exact instructions that Dyatlov and the group followed. This is following later instruction manual from mid 70s .
"A serious emergency situation: a group gets lost in bad weather, loses their skis, and descends to the edge of the forest. The forest, with its ability to start a fire, offers salvation to the struggling tourist group. The leader or experienced hikers must quell panic and motivate the group to take action (after all, hunters and taiga dwellers spend the night in the forest without tents in winter). Therefore, they should head deeper into the forest to find a lull from the wind. The strongest go ahead to dig a trench in the snow. An exhausted comrade should not be left to rest (they won't survive); everyone must stick together. Having chosen a site for an emergency camp with plenty of dead wood, the group decides where to start a fire. If an axe and saw are unavailable, a spot with plenty of thin deadwood or large trees with dry lower branches that can be broken off by hand is chosen. Two or three people gather firewood for the night, while the rest dig a hole to the ground. Snow from the pit is carried up in backpacks and windbreakers, the bottom of the pit is lined with spruce branches, the top is partially covered with branches, and then a fire is lit. The group warms up and settles down for the night.
If the snow cover is shallow or the ground is open, the chosen spot under large trees is cleared of snow to the ground, a shelter or windbreak is built, firewood is stored for the night, and a fire is lit. Everyone warms up and dries their clothes. Dinner is prepared. If there is no bucket, water for tea is boiled in mugs or tin cans. In the morning, when the weather improves, the group follows their tracks upward, above the tree line, determines their location, and reaches the abandoned skis. If bad weather persists, depending on specific conditions and available information, they make their way to the hunter's road or ski track, which they use to reach the hut, etc".
-
Ziljoe, in your opinion, how did the ravine collapse occur—before or after the looting of the clothing? And how do you explain the absence of injuries on Kolevatov, given that he was found embracing Zolotaryov?
-
I'm a bit indecisive about the chronology of the clothing or swapping. As I progress with this I have found that those who are to dig a snow hole are to be the better dressed and it would seem that the roles are rotated. For example , the Yuris may have started digging with others , then retreated to the fire, and dried clothing whilst others took a jumper or footwear.
Obviously that doesn't answer every question but it is formulating towards recommendations.
The absence of injuries being the same as Zolo are due to the weight distribution and what lies below the bodies. It might suggest he was at the edge of the mass.
In ideal controlled situations, or at least with more equipment the instructions are thus.
"After stopping, the leader shows where to put the backpacks and assigns each participant's responsibilities for digging the cave. Everyone puts on warm clothes, zips up their jackets, and tightens their hoods to prevent snow from getting under their clothes while they work. They take all the tools they need for the upcoming work out of their backpacks: hacksaws, shovels, and a two-handed saw. If they lack tools, they can use pots and axes."
"To build a cave more quickly, it's important to plan and organize the upcoming work based on the specific conditions and available tools. After all, each person in the group needs to remove approximately one cubic meter of snow.
Cave digging should be done across a broad front to allow as many people as possible to participate simultaneously. Therefore, in a group of, say, eight people, three or four should dig, two or three people (depending on the cave's layout) should shovel out the excavated snow, and the rest should prepare snow bricks to form the cave's front wall. Snow bricks or blocks should be 25-40 cm wide, of any uniform height, and of any length.
The most productive work is achieved when one or two people make horizontal and vertical cuts with hacksaws, followed by two people chipping away chunks of snow with shovels. In soft snow, a good tool for digging a cave is a two-handed saw that bends into an arc and acts as a scraper.
The cave cavity should be arched, allowing one to stand upright in the center. There should be no corners in the cave's roof. This will protect the cave from collapse under any adverse conditions: thin ceiling, low-density snow, etc."
I say again, this is advice to build a snow hole under different conditions but it aligns with what we see at the ravine and cedar , all these actions are what the group would have been taught , or at least the more experienced of the group.