Recent Posts

81

General Discussion / Re: That pesky footwear

« Last post by GlennM on October 13, 2026, 12:42:59 PM »

Osi, I am firmly in the camp that says all the injuries reported by the medical examiner were sustained during the DP9's individual and collective efforts to survive. I appreciate your being able to highlight common outdoor injuries. Thanks for the post.

My concern with Igor goes to an idea that the group was only going as fast or far as the slowest hiker. When I read about Igor's lower leg injuries, I think it is a sprain. It could also be a friction rash except for the deeper tissue injury.

I think the matter of Igor's leg injury is of significance if it caused the party to stop short of their goal of getting to Ortoten. Yet, in opposition,  think it insignificant because, I expect something akin to a ski crutch or a ski pole crutch traces identified from tent to woods. Additionally, though it is reported that a leg wrap was found at or near the site of the disaster, the wrap was not around Igor's bad ankle,,where it ought to be.

 If Igor really did have a bad leg, I expect he would one of the last to make it back to the tent, and not without assistance and not without a walking stick to help with the uphill  climb back.

What does any of this mean? The best laid plans still surrender to fate sometimes.

82

General Discussion / Re: 2 Chinese lanterns

« Last post by Ramsay on October 13, 2026, 04:24:27 AM »

Bongyi, a conventional avalanche was impossible to occur that night, And a plate avalanche, although rare, is something that could have happened. Although I don't believe it's plausible that a plate avalanche occurred in the tent, it's impossible that Zolotarev and Dubinina were injured there.

83

General Discussion / Re: 2 Chinese lanterns

« Last post by bongyi on October 12, 2026, 06:23:08 PM »

In connection with the re-examination of the case in 2019, official scientific expert opinions were prepared, which try to describe the climatic conditions of the period February 1-2, 1959 for the snow slope of the tent and the surroundings of the cedar; also the estimation of visibility; and the probability of a possible avalanche.

In addition, in 2021, Swiss scientists who had never been to the site, for some reason also developed a theory about slab-avalanche with the help of snow simulation software made for a Disney cartoon (which they downloaded illegally from the Internet).

Based on these, only 10 millimeters of snow fell on the spot during the indicated period, and not 30 centimeters, which you consider necessary for the avalanche. However, unlike you, these expert opinions consider it possible to develop an avalanche even in such conditions. And the visibility was only 16 meters. (which means that by moving 30-50 meters away from the tent, they would have found their way back to it only by following their footprints)

It is important to take into account that there are no meteorological data from the area determined by measurement from the time of the incident, only from distances of 50-100 km. Although experts can draw nice graphs in the documentation, but the data that the graphs show are based on speculation and have a lot of uncertainty.

Regarding the avalanche, other, unofficial, but serious expert opinion are also submitted, from someone who has visited the site several times and examined the structure of the snow on the given slope. He rules out any kind of avalanche in this area!

I have not seen any data showing that documented avalanche cases have occurred on this slope in the last 60 years! What are we talking about?

Your comment about the difference in snow conditions shown by the pictures digging up the tent site and the picture of the found tent is very good! The origin of the pictures digging up the tent site (there are two such pictures) is completely uncertain. They do not appear on any inventoried film negatives! In these pictures, one of the hikers can be recognized by his clothing. But what proves that these pictures were taken on this tour? It is also possible that the pictures were really taken on this tour, and we can really see them digging up the last tent site, but this site is different from the site that shows the tent found - because the tent was moved by someone.

84

General Discussion / Re: four questions and some answers

« Last post by Ramsay on October 12, 2026, 01:48:49 PM »

Well put, Axelrod. Separating concrete physical evidence from added assumptions is precisely why I established those three rules for this topic. When we discard baseless speculation, the core facts define the boundaries of any viable reconstruction.

Regarding SURI’s observation about "escorted supervision":
Claiming that an external force marched them down requires physical evidence in the records—such as tracks from different types of footwear, signs of physical restraint, or defensive trauma caused by weapons—none of which appears in the investigation files or forensic reports. Alleging that the case files are "incomplete" in order to fill these gaps steers us away from an objective reconstruction and into unverifiable speculation.

As Axelrod noted, sticking to what is known allows us to reconstruct a realistic sequence: an urgent evacuation, a cohesive retreat to the tree line, a joint effort to secure fire and shelter, and a desperate attempt to retrieve essential equipment.

The rules I laid out serve as the ultimate filter that no far-fetched theory will be able to pass.

85

General Discussion / Re: four questions and some answers

« Last post by Ziljoe on October 12, 2026, 01:44:59 PM »

Thank you again Ramsay.

IRZ is suggesting that they may just have dropped one by one as the tried to return. There was a similar incident in the Cairngorms UK in 1971. There were a group of younger hikers guided by some young teachers . It was a simple enough accident caused by bad weather and being unprepared. When the winds and blizzard hit , they attempted to find the lower path. They dug in to a snow bank for the night. 2 of the students undid their sleeping bags and started to remove clothing. The young female teacher and elder student made an attempt to get help the following morning. The search helicopters were out and struggling against the winds and weather. The teacher carried on ,crawling on all fours through the snow drifts  and was spotted randomly by the search helicopter. When she was approached her legs were frozen bent and her hands, she could only mutter enough information to give the general location of the students. Unfortunately all died but one.

The point being, the female teacher was fighting against all the odds to try and somehow save the others and if she had not been spotted , she would probably have been found in a similar condition as Zina.

If IRZ were trying to do something to save the others and themselves, the only logical thing they could do was try to regain the equipment at the tent. By the time the events had unfolded , their extremities would be getting compromised by the minute , as each one failed climbing the slope , the question must have been in their minds to stay with the person who dropped or to keep moving.

If that was the scenario, saddening as it is , it's is testimony to Zinas strength ,mentally as well as physically.

86

General Discussion / Re: four questions and some answers

« Last post by Axelrod on October 12, 2026, 01:38:54 PM »

To get a clear picture of events, we need to distinguish assumptions from assertions and avoid making unnecessary claims.
In other words, we need to separate the cutlets from the flies that have swarmed over them and covered them.

87

General Discussion / Re: four questions and some answers

« Last post by SURI on October 12, 2026, 01:36:56 PM »

Your observation that the vest was handed to Dyatlov near the cedar tree fits a key piece of the puzzle: it confirms that Dyatlov was down there at the edge of the forest with the rest of the group before the attempt to ascend!

I doubt he would have gotten any further, considering he was placed by the birch tree.

Although the hypothesis of a physical confrontation on the slope attempts to explain Slobodin's skull fracture, the total absence of defensive wounds on his hands or knuckles—combined with the calm, parallel pattern of the footprints leading down the mountain—makes it difficult to reconcile the idea of ​​a human attack with the forensic findings.

They were led down the slope under supervision, and the forensic findings are incomplete.

88

General Discussion / Re: four questions and some answers

« Last post by Ramsay on October 12, 2026, 01:05:58 PM »

I understand your point, Zilijoe. The fact that I maintain the idea that they went against the wind comes from bibliographies I’ve read (I remember Rakitin is one of them), but climate maps also suggest this. If proven otherwise, I’ll abandon that point. This is one of the reasons why I classify the direction they went as worse than Labaz's direction (south) and consider that the winds were a catalytic factor in the tourists’ deaths. I also agree that the people killed in the ravine died from snow compression (except Kolevatov). The fact that Doroshenko and Krivo's clothes were found on the bodies in the ravine suggests that they died first, and some factor was strong enough to keep them on the cedar fire until death. It’s also at this moment that I think the slope group (Dyatlov, Zina, and Slobodin) somehow separated (maybe progressive loss of consciousness, combined with freezing winds and extreme fatigue).

89

General Discussion / Re: four questions and some answers

« Last post by Ziljoe on October 12, 2026, 12:37:46 PM »

Thank you Ramsay.

I'm not sure why you think the wind is against them? The direction to the labaz is further and would leave them more exposed for longer. I don't think they had any other option than down or to the labaz but whatever the incident that made them leave , being closer and in viewing distance of the tent has an advantage for returning to it. From the labaz , nothing would be seen.

Regarding your question on , what point they were hit?, I'm assuming you mean at what time ?. If that is the question then I do not know the answer. At present, I am inclined to believe the ravine 4 died from a snow collapse , the autopsy data leans towards compression and continued restricted breathing. The injuries across the 4 in the ravine imply different compression loads resulting in different individual impact areas. Chronology it's difficult to know who died first or in what order, other than the Yuris didn't seem to be the last to die. The den flooring implies that someone intended to shelter there , whether the collection of branches were already part of a structured snow hole or being collected for the purpose of a bigger snow hole I do not know.

However , I think that all the activity suggests nothing more than an attempt to survive the cold. The bodies may have been covered that they could not be dug out , or maybe one was at the edge like lyunda.

I have thought about the spacing between them as a chain of visual markers but ultimately I would think they would go together as a group. It is evidenced that survivors will crawl with frozen limbs until they physically collapse.

The clothe swapping is vague and ultimately a bit of guessing and has changed over the years so that depends on which version you read. I think the only confirmed use of clothing is the jumper that was cut to make a legging for lyunda.

I have also toyed with the idea that the ravine 4 were being prepared and dressed for the assault on the tent hence their better clothing , it was then a collapse happened, hence the swapped or donated clothing . If not , it raises the question as to why hats and boots were not taken from the ravine 4 on their effort to retrieve items from the tent.

90

General Discussion / Re: four questions and some answers

« Last post by Ramsay on October 12, 2026, 12:22:44 PM »

Thank you for clarifying your point of view, SURI.

Your observation that the vest was handed to Dyatlov near the cedar tree fits a key piece of the puzzle: it confirms that Dyatlov was down there at the edge of the forest with the rest of the group before the attempt to ascend!

Although the hypothesis of a physical confrontation on the slope attempts to explain Slobodin's skull fracture, the total absence of defensive wounds on his hands or knuckles—combined with the calm, parallel pattern of the footprints leading down the mountain—makes it difficult to reconcile the idea of ​​a human attack with the forensic findings.

I appreciate you sharing your perspective on the matter. These questions are not intended as an interrogation, but rather as a filter to determine which reconstruction of events best holds up against the physical evidence.