91
General Discussion / Re: About fire
« Last post by GlennM on October 18, 2024, 02:26:01 PM »So you conclude the tourists did not stop at the ravine, but rather went directly to the cedar, yes?
Recent Posts
92
General Discussion / Re: Hubris and risk taking?
« Last post by GlennM on October 18, 2024, 02:21:53 PM »This information is consistent with my hypothesis regarding what drove them out. Thanks.
93
General Discussion / About fire
« Last post by Osi on October 18, 2024, 01:17:21 PM »Think of a straight line between the tent and the cedar tree. On this line; there are footprints, bodies and a fire. Neither 100 meters to the right nor to the left. This fire is a fire lit on the night of the incident.
The existence of the fire leads to two conclusions.
1- The fire was lit by the tourists.
2- The fire was lit by the murderers who were waiting to question the tourists to keep warm.
If the murderers wanted to stage the young people freezing to death, it is illogical for them to leave the fire as evidence.
The detectives and the public would think like this:
- They have a fire, they cannot have frozen. What killed them?
If a strong fire had been lit there during the interrogation, all traces would have definitely been eliminated and we would have been convinced that the young people froze to death.
The tourists lit the fire, but 1 or 2 people. Under very difficult conditions (the onset of hypothermia and a storm blowing more than 50 miles per hour) by breaking branches with their hands and falling from the tree. You can light a fire in a blizzard of 90-100 km/h, but you can never warm yourself in this fire. Maybe you throw your glove or a handkerchief into the fire and see it burn, but it only gives off a little heat around a hand and does not warm you.
A failed fire that was lit in panic and haste. The fire pit was not opened and all 9 tourists could not support this fire.
Although these findings do not give an idea about what happened that night, they contain the opposite ideas that I have in mind against the opinions in the forum that some of the tourists were tortured with fire or that the killers may have lit the fire while waiting to lure the group into a trap.
The existence of the fire leads to two conclusions.
1- The fire was lit by the tourists.
2- The fire was lit by the murderers who were waiting to question the tourists to keep warm.
If the murderers wanted to stage the young people freezing to death, it is illogical for them to leave the fire as evidence.
The detectives and the public would think like this:
- They have a fire, they cannot have frozen. What killed them?
If a strong fire had been lit there during the interrogation, all traces would have definitely been eliminated and we would have been convinced that the young people froze to death.
The tourists lit the fire, but 1 or 2 people. Under very difficult conditions (the onset of hypothermia and a storm blowing more than 50 miles per hour) by breaking branches with their hands and falling from the tree. You can light a fire in a blizzard of 90-100 km/h, but you can never warm yourself in this fire. Maybe you throw your glove or a handkerchief into the fire and see it burn, but it only gives off a little heat around a hand and does not warm you.
A failed fire that was lit in panic and haste. The fire pit was not opened and all 9 tourists could not support this fire.
Although these findings do not give an idea about what happened that night, they contain the opposite ideas that I have in mind against the opinions in the forum that some of the tourists were tortured with fire or that the killers may have lit the fire while waiting to lure the group into a trap.
94
General Discussion / Re: Hubris and risk taking?
« Last post by Partorg on October 18, 2024, 02:31:59 AM »Quote from: GlennM
It would appear that getting there and back as inexpensively as practical would be desirable. The group certainly travelled as cheaply as they could as well as saving energy until they started their push on skis
Аgree.
Quote from: GlennM
I'd like to explore your claim that a 30 meter difference in camp site could have made the difference. Do you believe, as I do that they set their tent in a hollow which allowed snow to accumulate and then break free?
Their last photo shows that they are digging into a slope of ~ 30°. This is a local increase in steepness on the terrace ledge. It extends upward no more than 3 meters. It is also 15 - 20 meters wide. It is not detected in modern measurements made by Shura, but in the last photo of the Dyatlovites team it is clearly visible. Apparently this is explained by the fact that there was less snow on the slope in January 1959 than during the measurements Shura. The top layer of snow from this area could have slipped onto the tent, flattening it and forcing the Dyatlovites by cutting the roof and get out in the clothes they were wearing when the tent fell.
In any case, the slope of the ski pole to the left of the entrance supports this assumption
95
General Discussion / Re: Hubris and risk taking?
« Last post by GlennM on October 17, 2024, 05:40:40 PM »Partog, thanks for the clarification about the route. It would appear that getting there and back as inexpensively as practical would be desirable. The group certainly travelled as cheaply as they could as well as saving energy until they started their push on skis. I'd like to explore your claim that a 30 meter difference in camp site could have made the difference. Do you believe, as I do that they set their tent in a hollow which allowed snow to accumulate and then break free?
96
General Discussion / Re: Hubris and risk taking?
« Last post by Partorg on October 17, 2024, 02:58:41 PM »There is no need to look for a black cat in a dark room, and in Malevich’s painting “Black Square” silhouettes of three blacks stealing coal on a November night...
Reaching the hill called Otorten, even in winter, is not a feat capable of raising self-esteem, let alone glorification. The difficulty of the hike lies in its length through unpopulated terrain. But there is nothing extraordinary about it either.
It is an ordinary sports trek of the 3rd category. Otorten was necessary for logistic beauty and completeness of the route - traverse of the «Belt Stone» Ridge from Otorten to Oiko-Chakur.
Their deaths had nothing to do with the route as such - if they had stopped 30-40 meters closer or farther from the place where they stopped and most likely would have stayed alive.
Reaching the hill called Otorten, even in winter, is not a feat capable of raising self-esteem, let alone glorification. The difficulty of the hike lies in its length through unpopulated terrain. But there is nothing extraordinary about it either.
It is an ordinary sports trek of the 3rd category. Otorten was necessary for logistic beauty and completeness of the route - traverse of the «Belt Stone» Ridge from Otorten to Oiko-Chakur.
Their deaths had nothing to do with the route as such - if they had stopped 30-40 meters closer or farther from the place where they stopped and most likely would have stayed alive.
97
General Discussion / Re: Hubris and risk taking?
« Last post by GlennM on October 17, 2024, 12:28:11 PM »The burden of leadership includes being methodical. They wanted a grade 3 certification. They didn't file a route plan. They didn't have train fare, they didn't have room accommodations. Money was tight. They ran afoul of the law twice. They did not heed heed the forester's warning. They had a team member who couldn't go the distance. They made plans to structure their day and failed to follow the plan. They argue over repairing the tent. There is attitude over a tangerine slice. They are beaten back a day by weather. They did go to movies and sing songs. They took candid photos. This loosely formed expedition of friends appears to be more about letting off steam and being in tune with unstructured and wild Nature rather than a focused campaign to achieve a specific goal. It is remarkable how soon things fell apart once they left civilization, Was it only two days?
At their ages, save Zolo, youthful invincibility seems to be their contingency plan. Admittedly, it is a lot to expect to have a backup plan for the gear, the route, the,weather and injury. Evidently, once they left the tent (either on 1079 or in the woods,,depending on your point of view),,they were improvising. Improvising translates into not having and immediately grabbing footwear and a "bugout bag" of essentials. It is not so much about running from a thing as it is running to something else. Once there will they be prepared?
At their ages, save Zolo, youthful invincibility seems to be their contingency plan. Admittedly, it is a lot to expect to have a backup plan for the gear, the route, the,weather and injury. Evidently, once they left the tent (either on 1079 or in the woods,,depending on your point of view),,they were improvising. Improvising translates into not having and immediately grabbing footwear and a "bugout bag" of essentials. It is not so much about running from a thing as it is running to something else. Once there will they be prepared?
98
General Discussion / Re: Questions on Lyuda's body position
« Last post by GlennM on October 16, 2024, 02:07:20 PM »If Lyuda was moved,,it must be to preserve her remains. What a grim and awkward job. I do not have information that her ribs were bound after being broken. She may have been lifted on the ledge by friends or slid down from above in order to breathe, but beyond this, everyone was trying to save themselves...mostly.
99
General Discussion / Re: Questions on Lyuda's body position
« Last post by Axelrod on October 16, 2024, 10:03:19 AM »Askinadzi says in position 33:33 that only Lyuda was moved before prosecuters arrival.
100
General Discussion / Re: Questions on Lyuda's body position
« Last post by GlennM on October 15, 2024, 05:57:15 PM »Too, she and others were excavated from deep snow. A crushing depth of snow perhaps?
But you know, the more I look at her photo, the more I think she should have slipped all the way down and come to rest flat out with her face on the ground. To die in that posture and then be covered with bone crushing snow is a testament to an indifferent Nature.
But you know, the more I look at her photo, the more I think she should have slipped all the way down and come to rest flat out with her face on the ground. To die in that posture and then be covered with bone crushing snow is a testament to an indifferent Nature.