Tree vs snow collapse theory.

[Falcon73]

Hello.  This is my first post really on any type of forum so please forgive me if I am not adding these thoughts in the proper place or if they been  discussed before. 
Regarding the tree collapse theory I think it is a totally reasonable scenario.  The only thing that gives me pause is if I think about an explosion and a tree falling on people sleeping laying down. 
If there is an explosion nearby I would expect people to sit up rapidly even from deep sleep.
Regarding the snow collapse I suppose could also be a possibility if everything were placed just so on rocks for the chests, head etc. 
One thing that would give me second thoughts about this (other than the positioning needing to be perfect actually relates to the idea of any predation for eyes, tongue etc.  If the bodies were under that much packed snow what could get at them.
I have known about this incident for about a year and a half and had just rewatched a few specials and found this site and became hooked.
Please forgive any overeagerness, duplication or naivete on my part.  I look forward to engaging in discussions.

[Ziljoe]

Hi Falcon73.

There's several thoughts to the snow collapse at the ravine or tent and the tree. These explanations try to deal with the injuries found, particular the ravine 4 as you may have already read.

Other explanations are people falling from the ceder when breaking the branches for wood, outsiders physically causing bodily harm to the hiker's or some type of blast or explosion.

These are my observations

1) Snow slab/slide on the slope I doubt  caused the injuries, if it did , I can't see how the bodies could have been moved to the ravine. They are too severe.

2) A snow collapse at the ravine seems the most likely location for the fractures given the fact that the bodies are found at ground level on top of stones. The injuries, or fractures seem to correspond from the ground side. The thinking is the from a snow cave collapsing instantly and pushing the bodies against the solid ground. They are found under 3 meters of snow, so it's plausible.

3) there's no question that a tree falling could cause many of the injuries.

I don't think it matters which theory is chosen regarding the eyes or tongue. We can see from the autopsy photos and statements that they were decaying , badly. There's a lot of missing skin and hair, they break down of the bodies had started. Depending on the thaw and the amount of melt water, I would suspect that for a number of weeks there would have been a tunnel for the stream under the water, the water would cut its own path leaving an arch. There are some small animals in the area.

I would say the missing eyes and tongue could be removed from the mystery. It's probably the easiest to explain.

[Falcon73]

I see your point.  I haven't been at it long enough to formulate a theory of my own for the whole incident.  Therefore I am just trying to filter out for myself any pieces that can be discounted by logic.  However Ii guess that is not as easy as it seems or there wouldn't be. Mystery anymore.

[Ziljoe]

I've been looking at this for nearly ten years and haven't come up with a theory. Probably followed most people's thinking with similar thoughts.

I think a few things need discounted. Sometimes I think the DPI was designed or manipulated to be mystery. It's like an endless loop of a'ha moment's followed by disappointment as you realised you hit a dead end.

[GlennM]

My problem with the tree theory is (1) accidents happen,(2) no identificable tree damage on tent (3) no definitive tree damage on hikers,(4) no identifiable tree branch found (5) if the tent was in the forest, they would have used the stove (6) if the tent was in the forest,  where was Igor and the other two going? (7) who and how would the branch get removed, the tent rolled up, moved and reconstructed a mile away,,complete with snow slab crush on it? (8) if a blast made a branch fall on the hikers, how did the blasters know where to look for them, and was there not a,chance of being found out if any of the hikers survived the fallen branch, cold and privation? (9) if you just got pummelled by a fallen branch, why would anyone then turn around and climb up the cedar tree? Isn't one calamity enough?

[Arjan]

After studying the snow collapse theory and the tree collapse theory, it is obvious that one major detail cannot be explained by both theories.

The post mortem report of Lyudmila states that she had suffered a fatal ribcage fracture that had caused internal bleedings. Several experts have estimated that she has probably died within 15 minutes after her fatal injury.
It is highly unlikely that she may have walked from the tent - as found by the first search party - to the ravine.

Of course the tent might have been moved from the area near the cedar/ravine to the place where the tent had been found by the first search party: the issues with this theory is mainly the logistics involved and besides: no traces for this move had been reported.
This move of tent and gear had involved at least one full day of hard work by several people, unless a helicopter had been used.

The photo of Lyudmila in the mortuary shows a ribcage without any visible bruises, damage, indents, deformation.
In case a tree had caused the fatal fracture, a deformation/indent of the ribcage may be expected; bruises might have been removed/camouflaged by the wax-like skin surface that had development by lying in water.

It is highly likely that she had been fatally injured when she had been standing in the ravine.
If this assumption is correct, she had been fetching running water together with Semyon and probably one other group member for spending the night in the tent placed as found by the first search party.
The group had not sufficient running water available after ascending the Dyatlov Pass for preventing dehydration during the night: the group had needed running water badly.
The first search party had not found a petrol burning for melting snow, or sufficient firewood for melting snow to running water.

Additional information that she may well have been standing in the ravine while she had been fatally injured: both her diary and the post mortem report after her death suggest that she had been cleaning herself during her monthly period.

In my opinion the best explanation for her ribcage fracture is:
- being hit by a pressure wave of several bar during a few milliseconds, compressing her ribcage uniformly all-around causing a - butterfly - ribcage fracture
- followed by an underpressure during around one second, this decompression had caused that the air in her lungs had let the ribcage expand to well beyond its normal size. Result: no injury visible
- tiny small particles (accelerated by the high pressure) from the wall of the ravine had penetrated her eye-balls.
- only the missing tongue remains unexplained

[Falcon73]

When I was referring to the snow collapse theory I meant the possibility that snow collapsed on them in their den in the ravine.  I don't think those injuries would have occurred at the tent and if they had it would have become apparent rather quickly at least for Lyudmila.  Why keep carrying her  if the situation was so dire.
I am starting to put together possibilities.  Let's say the snow slab or some amount of snow buried the tent and they had to make their way out and down the hill.  If it was night and high winds with whiteout conditions with brutal temperatures (I am not sure about you but with wind chill it must have been brutal.  If it took them an hour to get to the woods then they must have known they were done for already. 
I read one interview where they thought the party was trying to reach the cache but were off by 90 degrees because they came out of the side versus front of the tent. 
I was thinking possibly they reached the cedar and two remained to make a fire and possibly collect braches from the cedar for a den.  Dyatlov etc realized they went the wrong way and were forced to go back to tent for supplies as there was no way they were going to find the cache in those conditions. They obviously never made it and froze.  The two at the fire were also on look out for the three heading to the tent. They either placed too much  faith in their ability to light a fire or gave away some of their clothing to those going to build a den or both.  From the positions of the bodies at the cedar it looks like their arms are over their heads almost in a position they were dragged.  The burns need not to haven been before death.
The remaining 4 put together the den.  How the three were injured there I don't have any ideas other than they may have fell onto rocks in the dark.  I wish someone had the capability to do a Mythbusters type of test to see what exactly could cause those injuries with ballistic dummies.  That way if it was determined well this could happen in a fall.. but only 50 feet...or this could happen with weight but with much more than would ever be able to be generated by snow falling on them it would at least eliminate those possibilities. (Of course on the converse if it was possible then those saying it isnt would have to bring these back into their theories.)
I am totally open to all the other theories as well.  I just would like to eliminate theories using scientific fact applied directly to the scenario versus opinions or comparisons to other unrelated incidents.

[GlennM]

I advocate for either premortem or post mortem damage from a fall into Ravine 4, a crush of snow from the edge of the creek to the bottom, or both together. I would think that the effects of a depressurizing blast would be noticible on the trees in the area and perhaps on the snowpack itself. The tent itself would certainly been the worse for wear.