Recent Posts

81

General Discussion / Re: Route to Otorten

« Last post by GlennM on June 16, 2026, 12:28:54 PM »

In some sense of the word, the strategy could be understood as them making a dash for Ortoten to make up for lost time and fatigue from their uphill climb. I feel they made scant progress on their last camping day because of weather. This same weather plus deeper snow would have made camping in the next valley punishing. The ridge route had much in its favor, though exposure and an uneven ground were obstacles to overcome.  Personally, I would think that if they knew there were going to get stalled out, I would opt to pitch my tent to the lee side of boot rock.

82

General Discussion / Re: Route to Otorten

« Last post by Lampe7 on June 16, 2026, 11:38:11 AM »

Hi Glenn,

With the actual information that I have, I follow the same direction.

It might be that the group's plan on January 31, 1959, was to end the day inside the forest. If so, they would have headed directly north through the Auspiya valley rather than moving toward the 1,079-meter slope. This seems consistent with Dyatlov's diary entry, where he describes reaching the tree line and then descending south back into the Auspiya valley to spend the night.
However, it appears that they changed their strategy on February 1, 1959.

By that point they had effectively lost a day of progress. More importantly, they changed their logistical planning. On January 31 they chose to return to the forest without establishing a cache. On February 1 they created a supply cache before continuing. This was the opposite of what they had done the day before.

The decision was economically rational and solved several problems at once. First, it reduced the weight of their packs, making the ascent much easier and addressing difficulties that had become obvious on January 31.
Second, it opened a new strategic option: travelling above the tree line toward Otorten with less effort and potentially saving time.

If this interpretation is correct, then the route on February 1 was not simply a continuation of the previous day's track. The group would have been consciously implementing a different plan. Instead of following the track they had made on January 31, they would have created a new route adapted to their revised strategy.

In that sense, every member of the group would have been aware that they were doing something different from the day before, because of leaving there foot step path from yesterday.

83

General Discussion / Re: Route to Otorten

« Last post by GlennM on June 16, 2026, 08:33:55 AM »

When I read the case files. I get the interpretation  that the group wished to do the trip as economically as possible. Certain things interfered with that plan. I recall they wanted to ascend by skis the frozen Auspya tributary, but it was not solid, so they had to make their way along the embankment. They had to do a relay snow plowing to make progress. There was a suggestion that the group wanted to cross the saddle between 1079 and 880 in order to get to the valley of the Lovza. For some reason they didn't do that and instead crossed over  much higher above the tree line on the Auspya. They cached supplies and made an aborted effort to take the ridge route to Ortoten. Their second and final attempt failed, as we all understand. The ridge route to Ortoten had the advantage of less obstruction in trees, but the ground itself when exposed would be hard on skis and valenkis.

At the heart of it all was the desire to do things their way in spite of warnings in Fizhay and the weather. They were on a shoestring budget, they were using old and borrowed gear, they had a certain degree of sexual tension, they promised to swear off smokes and to some degree alcohol during the trek. Their route was ambitious.

84

General Discussion / Route to Otorten

« Last post by Lampe7 on June 16, 2026, 12:22:47 AM »

First I thought, that the group walked the wrong way on the 01.02.1959. It was nearly pointed out as a fact within the book I have.

But in reference to the newer map (attached and found in the forum), the route to Otorten over the top of the hills, is marked as a possible way.
And it was also in the past used from the mansi.
So, yes, they didn't walked a long way on the 01.02.1959.
But the route seems not to be wrong.

Or are there facts that underline, that they where in the wrong route? What is your status on this point.

85

General Discussion / Re: Igor Djatlow Diary

« Last post by Lampe7 on June 15, 2026, 01:10:31 PM »

Hi Hunter,

Thank you again. I think it ist a mistake in translation of my actual book. It reference to Djatlows Diary but i think the group Journal ist ment.

86

General Discussion / Re: Igor Djatlow Diary

« Last post by Hunter on June 15, 2026, 09:52:32 AM »

Как такового дневника Игоря нет. Есть сканы его блокнота датированные 1957 годом, но это не походные дневники в привычном понимании или планы на следующие походы.

Igor doesn't have a diary as such. There are scans of his notebook dated 1957, but these aren't hiking diaries in the traditional sense or plans for future expeditions.

87

General Discussion / Igor Djatlow Diary

« Last post by Lampe7 on June 15, 2026, 12:52:27 AM »

I have noticed, that Igor Djatlow also had a diary on the tour, where he also noticed the routes he had and want to go.

I didn't found it in this forum. I found other diaries but not the on of Igor Djatlow.

Ist there a original or transcript?

Thank you very much.

88

General Discussion / Re: Nothing goes there

« Last post by SURI on June 14, 2026, 10:06:44 PM »

@Senior Maldonado

P.S. If you take every word Ivanov says literally, you will never understand him. First, you need to know where to begin. I would start with the names, because DPI is about names, not rockets.

89

General Discussion / Re: Connection between broken ribs and missing eyes

« Last post by GlennM on June 14, 2026, 11:51:47 AM »

I discount conspiracy theories period. For example, if Zolo was some sort of an infiltrator, he would have had an easier time bumping Yuri Yuden for a place on the hike rather than waiting for a chance opening. I do ask for a direct explanation of what the unlikely number if footprints is supposed to mean. Until I get clarification,I contend they all left together and tried to survive the conditions in the forest together until hypothermia prevailed.

I do not understand why a fire was not maintained and a snow cave was not also far better constructed. I surmise that firewood was too scarce and/ or winds too high. I do not get why searchers of the R4 group did not find worked snow.  I am not inclined to believe someone, for lack of a suitable weapon, was clubbing others with tree branches instead of using it for firewood. I am reminded that nobody at any time made an official condemnation of the hikers as dissidents or defectors. All of that is nonsense on stilts!

i am open to explanations that do not involve Zolo being the mad hatter or batter😀 It is known that conspiracy theorists can be both passionate and wrong.

90

General Discussion / Re: Connection between broken ribs and missing eyes

« Last post by SURI on June 14, 2026, 08:12:59 AM »

@GlennM

I think you are the one spinning conspiracies now by claiming there were 9 pairs of footprints. Tempalov clearly stated in an underlined note that he did not find the ninth footprint because it simply wasn’t there. And believe me, he knew exactly what he was talking about.