Hubris and risk taking?

[Axelrod]

I will continue what I left unwritten this morning.

The initial assumption in the topic seems completely wrong to me.

As I heard from Askinadz's interview, the institute paid money only for difficult hikes.
Since Igor Dyatlov went on 9 hikes before his 5th year (each winter+summer) and did not receive a salary yet, there was a problem with the availability of money.
It seems to me that they just wanted to go on a hike, but the hike does not reach the level of difficulty.
From Korolev's interrogation, it is clear that a difficult hike is 350 kilometers,
but for Dyatlov's group, 300 km were allowed.

Further, of these 300 km, they traveled the first 30 km by truck, 20 km with horse = a total of 270 (250) km.

Delays on the way are also unacceptable, because this means additional food, additional money and cargo.

Dyatlov's route itself seems strange (artificial) to me.
For proof, there is an assumption that no one has ever gone this route either before or after.
The mystical expedition of 1999 (an expedition for TV reportage) only went halfway along the ridge 40 years later and they shortened the route to get to Vizhay on February 12. Thus, this route could not have been completed in a short time.
I think that Dyatlov could have gotten to Vizhay only on February 16, when he should be WANTED already.

The group of Karelin and Blinov also had a circular route.
I do not know how popular circular routes are and it is difficult to imagine what caused this in 1959.
I myself have been on circular routes - only when the second half of this route is by transport.
Perhaps the requirement of the city route commission is not to go beyond the borders of the Sverdlovsk region.

But the route from Vizhay to the Dyatlov Pass, to Otorten and further beyond Otorten is popular.

[GlennM]

Axelrod, enlighten me please. When you speak of a circular route, are you saying that the hikers do not retrace their footsteps?  Would an example of this be hiking to Ortoten by the ridge route and returning by the valley route, or vis versa?
This then would be different than taking the same straight path to Ortoten and back again to the labaz and home, yes?

A circular route should be chosen if it has advantages. The Dyatlov group had a time restriction. What makes sense to you? Further, why would any outsider wish to bother with experienced and innocent hikers. That is just asking for trouble! I believe they had a naturally caused disaster, not some spy story conspiracy. There is no reason for it. But it does make me think that since they lost a day of progress, they may have taken a risk to get to Ortoten the fast way.

[Axelrod]

Let me explain my thoughts for those who do not have a map of the route.
They had a circular route (or a triangular route) Vizhay - Otorten - Oiko-Chakur - Vizhay.



The storage facility (labaz) was planned in 2 places (15 km from Otorten and 15 km from Oiko-Chakur).


By the way, Mount Oiko-Chakur is higher (like Chistop), and Mount Otorten is lower (even lower in old data).
But Dyatlov had already been to Chistop and Oiko-Chakur, he wanted to visit Otorten and for some unknown reason wanted to visit Oiko again.

Usually modern tourists make a radial route Vizhay - Otorten - Manpupuner - Otorten - Vizhay, i.e. there and back.
Dyatlov's failed route has not been repeated by anyone.

This movement along the ridge between Otorten and Oiko-Chakur is very strange. What didn't they see there?
Perhaps Dyatlov (or Dubinina) wanted to visit Otorten, but then the route would be 200 km.
To increase the route to 300 km, they made it so incomprehensible.

Many tourists had poor eyesight (Dyatlov, Dubinina, Thibault-Brignolle). Doroshenko had poor eyesight in general.
What could they see around them? But if the route was a sport one, then it becomes clear.

I think that the cause of death of all the tourists was an irresistible force, in several stages.
Investigator Ivanov wrote this in the newspaper in 1990:

This means that there was some terrible force that not only frightened them, but also forced them to leave the tent and seek shelter below, in the taiga. The task of the investigation was to find this force or at least get closer to it.

[Arjan]

A few considerations on hubris and risk taking:

I remember having read that the group - with their clothing - had not been able to trek during daytime with temperatures below minus 16 degrees celsius. This fits my analysis on hypothermia: with temperatures below minus 16 the group had been able during trekking on skis to maintain their core temperature on 37 degrees celsius only during two or three hours: after two or three hours their core temperature had started to drop to mild hypothermia. It had taken a little less than two hours to set their campsite and they had entered the first state of hypothermia.
This analysis shows that the group had to stay well within one or two days from the 'civilised' world; otherwise they had been in severe trouble by a few days temparatures below minus 16 degrees celsius.

Looking at the map of the storage and tent area, the group had not had adequate equipment (every member an ice-axe (piolet) and crampons) for the ascend - 30 percent on average over around 1 kilometer - from the storage to the tent area. This climb had posed a serious risk for a dangerous slide. The group members had not been able to apply a self-arrest when they had started to slide with a heavy rugsack and skis and poles in their hands.

The diaries suggest that Lyudmila had not been top fit and that several male tourists had been moody by nicotine deficiency.

The photos and diaries suggest that there had been problems with planning and group leadership, e.g.
- Who on earth leaves Vishay on 16:00 pm - one hour before sunset!!! - for the track to second settlement over a not fully frozen river?
- How did the group pass Ushma (look at the long lists of Mansi words in three diaries?
- Igor looks worried - and wandering along - on most photos after the group had left Vishay. Zinaida makes a similar observation the diary that is described to her.