Footprints

[seniorsupport]

Hi guys
Does anyone else think the whole footprints in the snow is suspicious? I mean it was February and the poor hikers had been thrown off course by hiking in a blizzard the evening before their deaths so it's probably safe to say there are numerous blizzards at this time of year.  Also all the bodies were buried under the snow at varying depth by the time they were found. So how/why was so much emphasis put on the hikers visable foot prints ?  Surely their footprints would have either been windswept or buried by the time the search parties arrived. Thus making the theory of all the hikers left in a calm orderly manner redundant- what do you guys think?
 Seniorsupport

[SimplyMadness]

Foot prints are apparently preserved in the snow quite well because the snow that's stepped on is left tightly compacted and the loose snow around it is blown away, leaving a raised hump. There are multiple testimonies to footprints leading down to the woods being found and there are some pictures of them that are posted on this site from the investigation.

That being said, the pictures of the tracks supposedly belonging to the 9 hikers are pretty poor quality. I for one, cant make out individual toes lke a couple of the testimonies say.

One testimony listed goes -
“When we finished taking inventory of the tent’s contents, we moved it to the helicopter pad, about 600- 700 m away.” Radiogram: “We managed to identify footprints of eight or nine people starting from the tent and going about 1 km down the slope, and then they were lost. One person was in boots, the others were only in socks and barefoot.”

It's interesting that he says with confidence that only one person was in boots when 3 people were found dead wearing boots. Slobodin had 1 boot on his right foot, Thibeaux had leather shoes on, and Zolotaryov had boots on.

This would seem to indicate that the tracks weren't that easy to identify and they were misread, or perhaps Zolotaryov and Thibeaux left the tent in only socks but managed to grab a pair of footwear before exiting the tent to put on once they got down the mountain. 

Apparently there is disagreement about where the tracks actually started too, with one testimony saying they started at the tent and another saying they started 30 to 40 meters away from the tent.

I would say its safe to assume that there was indeed evidence of tracks, but what information you can gather from that is questionable in my opinion. For instance the meme that the tracks indicated they had walked calmly down the hill in single file. I don't think the speed at which they were going could possibly be accurately measured and in the one photograph that shows multiple tracks, the tracks are not single file. They are clustered as if walking in a group, but definitely not what I would call single file.

All in all I would say any matter of fact statement garnered from the foot prints is dubious at best.

[Armide]

On top of all of that, let's not forget that when they first found some of the hikers it was supposed to be a search-and-rescue operation. Most of the volunteers were students their age and had no idea that they were walking all around a crime scene. When they realised they should have been looking at the tracks around the tent, they would've probably been unable to differentiate between those of the Dyatlov group and those of the volunteers. Some might've stood out (those not wearing any type of footwear) but the others were probably confused with all the footprints that were found at the area.

[Loose}{Cannon]

I think the footprints they documented were 'pillar' type prints that were compressed at the time they were made and later wind swept away the surrounding loose snow.  For the most part, it should have been easy to identify old vs new tracks. 

[hanno]

I have a further question. I have now read a lot of times, that the hikers left the tent and then or later stood in a row. Some people use this hint to argue that they were forced from other human to leave the tent. For example collect them in a row and then force them to match down the slope. But I can't see this in the footprint photos.

So first question: Where is this fact (if it is a fact) coming from? Someone must have told this because it is not seen in the photos.

Second question: If they would have stood in a row, in which direction did they stand? Towards the tent, towards the slope or another direction?

[CalzagheChick]

I have a further question. I have now read a lot of times, that the hikers left the tent and then or later stood in a row. Some people use this hint to argue that they were forced from other human to leave the tent. For example collect them in a row and then force them to match down the slope. But I can't see this in the footprint photos.

So first question: Where is this fact (if it is a fact) coming from? Someone must have told this because it is not seen in the photos.

Second question: If they would have stood in a row, in which direction did they stand? Towards the tent, towards the slope or another direction?

Wow I have never come across anything that's ever asserted that the group stood in a row. I've always read the same thing over and over again: they cut the tent from the inside outward and marched down the slope pretty orderly.

Now sometimes I'll come across a person that types up their synopsis of the story and they say that the group cut the tent from the inside out and scattered, but I know from the actual documents and evidence that there was no scattering in all directions. I think that's just a case of embellishing on an already crazy case. Some of the less-scientifically inclined tend to let their excitement for the strangeness of the facts run away with their imagination. I don't think it's malicious misinformation or anything like that.

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

I think the footprints they documented were 'pillar' type prints that were compressed at the time they were made and later wind swept away the surrounding loose snow.  For the most part, it should have been easy to identify old vs new tracks.

Yes, you are absolutely correct.

Also, the very formation of these "pillar" type footprints gives significant information about the wind conditions at the time when these footprints were made. This is very important to note, because it has been proposed that sound phenomena caused by strong winds scared the Dyatlov group of from the tent. However, it cannot be so because there was no such strong wind in the area on the night of February 1, 1959. 

To illustrate that point, I will quote from Svetlana Oss' "Don't go there":

"Modern experts say that the formation of specific footprints (raised columns) observed on the slope could only have been possible if the wind had not exceeded 3-4 m/s (6.84 mph). There were several experiments done on the slope in 2013, performed under different wind and temperature conditions. They were sponsored by the Russian newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda. The footprints mentioned could have formed under different temperature conditions, but only if there had been a snowfall that put at least 7 inches of fresh snow upon an older, firmer layer of snow underneath. It took approximately 15-17 hours for those raised footprints to form. Folks were walking and running in their socks and there were also rescue team members who walked around in their boots. Both left these raised footprints. But in less than a day they were obscured by the wind, which was 15-18 m/s (33-40 mph). There are many factors involved in their preservation, such as the sun, the wind and the temperature. As Brutsnitsyn earlier testified for the criminal case, some of these footprints can stay visible for the whole winter."

And significantly:

"The fact that the Dyatlov team's raised footprints were well preserved after almost a month suggests that the winds permitted sufficient time for them to get firm due to insulation and subsequent freezing. So the wind couldn't have been more than 3-4 m/s, which only confirms the weather report Lev Ivanov used. So we can be confident that from 17:00 to 24:00 local time on February 1 the winds were within 3-5 m/s. Thus there was no tornado-like vortex, and the shape of the landscape itself was not enough to create this odd sound effect."

(Quotations are from Svetlana Oss: "Don't go there," pages 113-114)

That is why these footprints are so important.

[Loose}{Cannon]

I personally do not believe that the footprints give much indication of wind speed at the time of creation. 

[Marchesk]

Wow I have never come across anything that's ever asserted that the group stood in a row. I've always read the same thing over and over again: they cut the tent from the inside outward and marched down the slope pretty orderly.

Both Svetlana Oss and Clark Williams says they stood outside the tent for a bit before heading off. The one thing is I don't know what evidence there is for this, other than it makes sense of them marching down the sloper in an orderly fashion. If they cut their way out of the tent in order to flee an imminent danger, then one would expect a more chaotic pattern of footprints. How would they have decided as a group to head in one direction if they're fleeing immediate danger?

[Loose}{Cannon]

Perhaps they never sliced their way out of the tent to begin with. 

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

I personally do not believe that the footprints give much indication of wind speed at the time of creation.

Be that as it may, it might then also be mentioned that the weather reports from three different weather stations to the north, north-east and south of the area also show that the wind was only moderate in this area on February 1.

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

Perhaps they ne er sliced their way out of the tent to begin with.

That is fully possible.

[Loose}{Cannon]

im not sure how accurately those stations can predict what was going on on the side of that mountain. 

The groups last four photos show a different story.

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

im not sure how accurately those stations can predict what was going on on the side of that mountain. 

The groups last four photos show a different story.

The fact that the three weather stations all reported a moderate breeze at the night of February 1 makes it highly improbable that there were intense winds at Kholat Syakhl.

Regarding the photos, the images shot by Krivonischenko show the group on their way and do not describe the weather when they died. The same can be said about the images called "loose photos" None of these photos tell us anything about the weather conditions on the night of February 1.

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

Perhaps they never sliced their way out of the tent to begin with.

Exactly.

We know that someone cut and damaged the tent.

We do not know whether the Dyatlov group left the tent through the these holes.

Most importantly, we do not know whether the Dyatlov group made these cuts.

[Loose}{Cannon]

im not sure how accurately those stations can predict what was going on on the side of that mountain. 

The groups last four photos show a different story.

The fact that the three weather stations all reported a moderate breeze at the night of February 1 makes it highly improbable that there were intense winds at Kholat Syakhl.

Regarding the photos, the images shot by Krivonischenko show the group on their way and do not describe the weather when they died. The same can be said about the images called "loose photos" None of these photos tell us anything about the weather conditions on the night of February 1.

 

Below is a German facsimile map for February 1, 1959, which means that the letter T denotes the cyclone, and the letter H, respectively, anticyclone:

German facsimile card for February 1, 1959


According to climatic data of 1959 from the site http://www.wetterzentrale.de/ , on February 1 the group was in the cyclone area! (red circle).

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

im not sure how accurately those stations can predict what was going on on the side of that mountain. 

The groups last four photos show a different story.

The fact that the three weather stations all reported a moderate breeze at the night of February 1 makes it highly improbable that there were intense winds at Kholat Syakhl.

Regarding the photos, the images shot by Krivonischenko show the group on their way and do not describe the weather when they died. The same can be said about the images called "loose photos" None of these photos tell us anything about the weather conditions on the night of February 1.

 

Below is a German facsimile map for February 1, 1959, which means that the letter T denotes the cyclone, and the letter H, respectively, anticyclone:

German facsimile card for February 1, 1959


According to climatic data of 1959 from the site http://www.wetterzentrale.de/ , on February 1 the group was in the cyclone area! (red circle).

The German data seem to be misleading for the relevant time and place. Reports from Russian weather stations give us an entirely different picture. We may quote from Svetlana Oss' "Don't go there" on page 113:

"...on January 31 when the students themselves mentioned a very strong and warm westerly wind. But on February 1 the weather changed suddenly both in terms of temperature, humidity and wind speed/direction. Apart from the weather report found in the criminal case file, which stated the winds were only 1-3 m/s (3-6 mph), there is data from the three weather stations in the area: Troitsk-Percherski, which is 123 miles north of Dyatlov Pass, Nyaksimvol (59 miles north-east) and Ivdel (75 miles north). The winds were reported on February 1: Nyaksimvol - 6 m/s, Ivdel - 5 m/s and Troitsk-Percherski - 5.5 m/s which is around 12 mph."

Surely the three weather stations which were situated around the Dyatlov pass area would have picked it up if there had been a cyclone center in that area at the time. The combined data from the above Russian weather stations clearly tell us that such was not the case. On the fateful evening, there was no strong wind according to their reports. It must be possible to verify these data once more by Russian sources.

[Loose}{Cannon]

The photographic evidence suggests otherwise?

[Per Inge Oestmoen]

The photographic evidence suggests otherwise?

It is not evidence of anything unless the photo was taken at the site at the same evening.

Hence the weather reports referred to earlier would be more indicative of the conditions than a photo where both time and place are highly uncertain.

I suggest that since there is a discussion about the wind, it would be natural to check and verify with the weather stations. The data for the relevant time in 1959 should be preserved in their archives.

[Loose}{Cannon]

Good thing we know where and when that photo was taken?   

[CalzagheChick]

Wow I have never come across anything that's ever asserted that the group stood in a row. I've always read the same thing over and over again: they cut the tent from the inside outward and marched down the slope pretty orderly.

Both Svetlana Oss and Clark Williams says they stood outside the tent for a bit before heading off. The one thing is I don't know what evidence there is for this, other than it makes sense of them marching down the sloper in an orderly fashion. If they cut their way out of the tent in order to flee an imminent danger, then one would expect a more chaotic pattern of footprints. How would they have decided as a group to head in one direction if they're fleeing immediate danger?

I actually just read both "Don't Go There" and "Dead Mountain" this weekend. I found the exact paragraphs that you are referring to as far as a language barrier of sorts for "standing in a line" to be very confusing. I couldn't really make sense of what she was trying to say in the long run of it so I just sort of kept reading instead of trying to figure out "so is she saying they were standing in a line or not?"

I've been playing catch up with all of the books. Before that, I was relying primarily on the actual documents available on the website. It gets to be information overload after a few weeks in the rabbit hole. I'm actually more taken aback why it seems in these books that Russians tend to find the American fascination with this cold case so suspicious.

[Loose}{Cannon]

A better clarification of the 'formation' in which they progressed down the slope would be great... I agree there is much confusion about this. 

I'm actually more taken aback why it seems in these books that Russians tend to find the American fascination with this cold case so suspicious

.

lol...   Im not surprised.   After all, It was the US spies that murdered their valuable contacts that helped them.  The communist Russians would never make an example of traitors cought within the party.