Amashilu, thank you for your response, appreciated! You point out that the interior of the tent was free of snow ( when found). This implies a breathable pocket of air which could sustain people long enough to at least get foorwear on before evacuating the tent. I agree with the concept, but now, how do we reconcile this with the evidence? One possibility is that those without shoes left the tent with the intent of going back in. I think of an outside cooking fire, a trip to the latrine, a call to witness something in the sky would suffice. Ziljoe argues for a wolverine getting in the tent and displacing the hikers.
What this leads to is the probability that once out, going in again was not an option.It is clear that no sane person is going shoeless in the dead of winter in the Urals.
We know from autopsy that there was food in the gut. We know that there were degrees of better or worse dressed when found. If a slab slide prevented access to the tent, it was because the height and spread of the snow made access impossible. Yet, I find it improbable that all nine were caught outside,of the tent at the same time, unless it was in an effort to,save the tent. If there were hurricane force winds that night, could the tent be saved from the inside? Or, would it be " all hands on deck" to save the tent from wind and accumulating snow? If that were the case and if it was clear that they could not stand the weather, then a hasty retreat might be in order. Too, there is a suggestion of,dense fog affecting their judgement of the distance to the treeline.