Dyatlov group's footprints on the slope, why icy?

[Senior Maldonado]

Many participants of the Search team remember that Dyatlov group's footprints had been remaining intact for a long time. Also, the footprints were visible within certain area only, e.g. there were no footprints close to the tent. There were no ski prints either, which could be expected to mark group's arrival to the spot.

Vladislav Karelin, who was a head of one of the first search groups, has written an article nowdays, which is called "Ice and Stones". In the article he also comes to the phenomenon of the footprints:

"Not far from the tent, we found... human footprints. There were about 8-9 pairs of them. The footprints led down the slope. As we descended, the nature of the footprints changed. At first, they were more like indentations in the snowy surface. However, as we continued down, they took on the appearance of small "pillars" that protruded a few centimeters above the snowy surface. We walked carefully around the footprints, trying not to disturb them. However, my curiosity got the better of me. One day, I kicked a footprint with the toe of my boot. It turned out to be made of ice. I kept kicking the footprint with my boot, but it didn't budge. In those distant days of February and March, I didn't pay much attention to the ice structure of the footprints. However, later on, the nature of the footprints became crucial in my reasoning. Why were the footprints made of ice? I had left my own footprints on the snowy slopes. But after a day or two, there was no trace of my footprints: the wind consistently destroyed them. However, the Dyatlov group's icy footprints remained for over a month."

It is clear that when temperatures are below Zero, ice keeps its firmness and shape. But the question is how those footprints turned from snowy objects to icy objects? And why that happened not everywhere on the slope but only within limited area. Karelin himself estimates size of that 'icy area' as 500x500 meters. In the article he says that all 3 stone ridges on the slope looked like icy surfaces with stones protruding from the surfaces.

One can think that getting icy in winter is typical for the slope in that place. However, Karelin rejects that possibility. From the same article:

"In the following years, I repeatedly visited this place in summer -- the slope of Mount Holat-Syakhl. As for winter conditions, I have not seen this place again. Has anyone seen the area of the stone ridges in winter conditions in the years following the tragedy? I asked this question to many who examined the winter slope of Mount Holat-Syakhl. And I always got the same answer: the winter slope of the mountain was monotonously snowy. And there were no stone ridges visible. At my request, this question was posted on the Dyatlov Foundation's website. It's been over a year. So far, no one has told me that he saw stone ridges in this place in winter."

Any ideas how Dyatlov group's footprints managed to convert from snowy to icy objects?

[Ziljoe]

Many participants of the Search team remember that Dyatlov group's footprints had been remaining intact for a long time. Also, the footprints were visible within certain area only, e.g. there were no footprints close to the tent. There were no ski prints either, which could be expected to mark group's arrival to the spot.

Vladislav Karelin, who was a head of one of the first search groups, has written an article nowdays, which is called "Ice and Stones". In the article he also comes to the phenomenon of the footprints:

"Not far from the tent, we found... human footprints. There were about 8-9 pairs of them. The footprints led down the slope. As we descended, the nature of the footprints changed. At first, they were more like indentations in the snowy surface. However, as we continued down, they took on the appearance of small "pillars" that protruded a few centimeters above the snowy surface. We walked carefully around the footprints, trying not to disturb them. However, my curiosity got the better of me. One day, I kicked a footprint with the toe of my boot. It turned out to be made of ice. I kept kicking the footprint with my boot, but it didn't budge. In those distant days of February and March, I didn't pay much attention to the ice structure of the footprints. However, later on, the nature of the footprints became crucial in my reasoning. Why were the footprints made of ice? I had left my own footprints on the snowy slopes. But after a day or two, there was no trace of my footprints: the wind consistently destroyed them. However, the Dyatlov group's icy footprints remained for over a month."

It is clear that when temperatures are below Zero, ice keeps its firmness and shape. But the question is how those footprints turned from snowy objects to icy objects? And why that happened not everywhere on the slope but only within limited area. Karelin himself estimates size of that 'icy area' as 500x500 meters. In the article he says that all 3 stone ridges on the slope looked like icy surfaces with stones protruding from the surfaces.

One can think that getting icy in winter is typical for the slope in that place. However, Karelin rejects that possibility. From the same article:

"In the following years, I repeatedly visited this place in summer -- the slope of Mount Holat-Syakhl. As for winter conditions, I have not seen this place again. Has anyone seen the area of the stone ridges in winter conditions in the years following the tragedy? I asked this question to many who examined the winter slope of Mount Holat-Syakhl. And I always got the same answer: the winter slope of the mountain was monotonously snowy. And there were no stone ridges visible. At my request, this question was posted on the Dyatlov Foundation's website. It's been over a year. So far, no one has told me that he saw stone ridges in this place in winter."

Any ideas how Dyatlov group's footprints managed to convert from snowy to icy objects?

A strange article and there seems to be context missing.

The raised foot prints are a fact of nature. They occur in many places and last for months. They have been recorded by film and photographs over many years on dyatlov pass by past visitors to the area. Snow is frozen water with air , when snow is compressed, like walking on snow , the air is gone , leaving it hard.

There is hoar frost and rime ice that form on the rocks and trees and these can be seen at dyatlov pass in many photos. My guess would be that these ice crystals melt during the day with the sun and turn to liquid taking away air from the snow surrounding the stones thus changing the property of the snow. It is recorded that some of the footprints were indentations that broken through a thin layer of ice , these were observed in and around the stone ridges .

I can't see how fuel from a rocket melts snow to form water then instantly turn into ice for the hikers to conveniently walk on ?



As for this quote:

"? I asked this question to many who examined the winter slope of Mount Holat-Syakhl. And I always got the same answer: the winter slope of the mountain was monotonously snowy. And there were no stone ridges visible. At my request, this question was posted on the Dyatlov Foundation's website. It's been over a year. So far, no one has told me that he saw stone ridges in this place in winter."

What does this even mean? Which slope is he talking about ? What is the winter slope ?

You can watch a modern video and see the stone ridges !!!

[Senior Maldonado]

I can't see how fuel from a rocket melts snow to form water then instantly turn into ice for the hikers to conveniently walk on ?

Please do not jump to rockets and fuels! Those are not in focus of this topic. Here I suggest to talk about Dyatlov group's footprints left on the slope in 1959 and discovered by the Search party. There are two questions to be answered:
1) How were the footprints formed?
2) How had the footprints been remaining intact for about two months?

Answer for the 2nd question seems to be suggested by Karelin's observation -- the footprints became icy at certain time, and ice cannot be damaged by winds like snow can. If icy footprints had been covered by fresh show after new snowfalls, on windy slope fresh show would have been blown away, thus uncovering the footprints again.

Trying to answer the 1st question, I can suggest the following theory--

On the slope, snow crust is formed over time due to permanenty blowing wind polishing the slope. The crust is actually old, very dense snow. If a person walks on the crust, he does not leave footprints, as if he is walking on asphalt. But if fresh, powdery snow has fallen on top of the crust, a person's foot compacts it down, pressing it between his sole and the crust. When a person has passed, a chain of indented footprints remains behind him. As we assume that wind constantly blows, the wind begins to blow the freshly fallen snow downhill. Sooner or later, the overall snow level will level out with the upper edge of the footprints, and footprints will cease to be indentations at that moment. Now the wind will continue to blow away both powdery snow outside the footprints and pressed snow inside them, but the speed of blowing will be different. Pressed snow takes much longer to be blown away. If powdery snow outside the footprints can be blown away in minutes, pressed snow in the footprints will be blown away in a few hours. For these hours we will observe raised footprints, then they will disappear -- will be leveled out with the crust.  In other words, pyramids of pressed snow will exist for the allotted hours and then they will be blown away. But in our case, something happened that prevented the pyramids from being blown away. According to Karelin, the footprints became icy, which he proved trying to destroy a footprint by kicking it with his boot.

For me ice means frozen water. If we accept the above theory, then Dyatlov group's snowy footprints had to be soaked by water at certain time. Then the water froze preserving the footprints' shapes. Or do we have other options?

[Senior Maldonado]

As for this quote:

"? I asked this question to many who examined the winter slope of Mount Holat-Syakhl. And I always got the same answer: the winter slope of the mountain was monotonously snowy. And there were no stone ridges visible. At my request, this question was posted on the Dyatlov Foundation's website. It's been over a year. So far, no one has told me that he saw stone ridges in this place in winter."

What does this even mean? Which slope is he talking about ? What is the winter slope ?

Sure, Karelin talks about the slope, which Dyatlov's group used for descent. The point is that when Karelin was on the slope in February-March 1959, he found the slope to be extremely icy in certain parts. And he somehow correlates  the icy slope with the icy footprints. He was trying to understand if it is typical for that exact slope to be icy the way he found it in 1959. And according to the article, nobody has managed to show him the slope looking the same way or similar to its appearance in 1959. Karelin himself has never visited the slope again in winter, that's why he tries to coollect info from other hikers, who have been there in winter.

Here is what another participant of the Search party, Sergey Sogrin, recalls about icy spots:

"At the end of the inspection of the site near the tent, Karelin informed me that he had noticed an "ice patch" on the slope below, near the stone ridges (kumurniks). This is the direction in which the Dyatlovites' footprints lead. Maslennikov suggested that we should examine their entire route to the cedar tree in the valley. ... According to Karelin's explanation, the "spot" he saw was an ice crust on the snow with protruding rocks. There were footprints in some places, and the ice was broken. Interestingly, as soon as Karelin stepped on the ice, he slipped and fell, almost hitting his head on a sharp rock. We, on the other hand, came across what we believed to be a slope glacier formed by groundwater. It was quite long and steeply descended into the valley. There were also rocks on the surface of the ice."

[Ziljoe]

I can't see how fuel from a rocket melts snow to form water then instantly turn into ice for the hikers to conveniently walk on ?

Please do not jump to rockets and fuels! Those are not in focus of this topic. Here I suggest to talk about Dyatlov group's footprints left on the slope in 1959 and discovered by the Search party. There are two questions to be answered:
1) How were the footprints formed?
2) How had the footprints been remaining intact for about two months?

Answer for the 2nd question seems to be suggested by Karelin's observation -- the footprints became icy at certain time, and ice cannot be damaged by winds like snow can. If icy footprints had been covered by fresh show after new snowfalls, on windy slope fresh show would have been blown away, thus uncovering the footprints again.

Trying to answer the 1st question, I can suggest the following theory--

On the slope, snow crust is formed over time due to permanenty blowing wind polishing the slope. The crust is actually old, very dense snow. If a person walks on the crust, he does not leave footprints, as if he is walking on asphalt. But if fresh, powdery snow has fallen on top of the crust, a person's foot compacts it down, pressing it between his sole and the crust. When a person has passed, a chain of indented footprints remains behind him. As we assume that wind constantly blows, the wind begins to blow the freshly fallen snow downhill. Sooner or later, the overall snow level will level out with the upper edge of the footprints, and footprints will cease to be indentations at that moment. Now the wind will continue to blow away both powdery snow outside the footprints and pressed snow inside them, but the speed of blowing will be different. Pressed snow takes much longer to be blown away. If powdery snow outside the footprints can be blown away in minutes, pressed snow in the footprints will be blown away in a few hours. For these hours we will observe raised footprints, then they will disappear -- will be leveled out with the crust.  In other words, pyramids of pressed snow will exist for the allotted hours and then they will be blown away. But in our case, something happened that prevented the pyramids from being blown away. According to Karelin, the footprints became icy, which he proved trying to destroy a footprint by kicking it with his boot.

For me ice means frozen water. If we accept the above theory, then Dyatlov group's snowy footprints had to be soaked by water at certain time. Then the water froze preserving the footprints' shapes. Or do we have other options?

Sorry, your link goes to rockets and thermal discussion by Karelin. Karelin in the article leads the narrative to this. Depending on the translation, it says his foot brushed the raised foot print.

"At first, they looked more like indentations in the snow surface. But then they took on the appearance of peculiar "pillars," protruding a few centimeters above the snow surface. We walked carefully around the footprints, trying not to disturb them. But curiosity got the better of me. And one day, I brushed against one of the tracks with the toe of my boot. It turned out to be icy. I kicked the track with my boot, but it remained untouched—perfectly intact. In those distant February-March days, I hadn't paid much attention to the icy structure of the tracks. But later, the nature of the tracks became quite significant in my reasoning. Why were the tracks icy? I left my own footprints on the snowy slopes. But within a day or two, not a trace of my tracks remained: the wind steadily erased them. The Dyatlov group's ice footprints, however, remained for over a month. I left the search on March 8th or 9th. And the footprints were definitely still there. Unfortunately, no one recorded the spring date when these footprints melted. What could have caused the ice footprints to form?"

Does he mean that the footprint came lose and was intact as a foot print , or does he mean it stayed stuck in place.?  I doubt karelin would not be aware of raised foot prints and how they occur , the article reads with the usual artistic merit to drag the reader in.



In the link below there lots of photos of raised footprints. Nature at work.

"Raised Footprints in Snow
Kaushik Patowary  Apr 15, 2013 
In extremely cold places, such as in Antarctica or in high altitudes, sometimes you get to see a peculiar phenomenon – footprints that are raised rather than depressed in the snow. What actually happens is when you step in the snow, the snow gets compressed and hardens, and then the wind blows the loose snow away leaving the once sunken footprints standing hard and proud on the surface. Eventually, the hardened snow gets eroded as well, but it takes weeks or even months. Raised snow footprints can last quite a while before all traces of the footprints are eroded away.

Because it requires more than a gale to blow away snow, raised footprints are often taken as an indicator of windslab and in mountain slopes, as potential avalanche danger. This is why you won’t see raised footprints in your backyard, unless you live in McMurdo."

https://www.amusingplanet.com/2013/04/raised-footprints-in-snow.html

I don't think karelin tried to destroy the footprint, he doesn't say that. Raised footprints are known in science , ice is known in science. We can see the photos of the raised footprints if 1959 and we can see them again from other hikes to 1079.

[Senior Maldonado]

Does he mean that the footprint came lose and was intact as a foot print , or does he mean it stayed stuck in place.?  I doubt karelin would not be aware of raised foot prints and how they occur , the article reads with the usual artistic merit to drag the reader in.

Besides this article, Karelin has spoken about Dyatlov group's footprints in numerous interviews. He says that he and his friends were advised to avoid touching the footprints, as they were important evidence for investigators. But once curiousity made him to touch one of the footprints gently by his boot. Despite his expectation, the footprint was not distorted at all by his touch. He touched again, that time with more force, but result was the same -- the footprint kept its shape, no distortion. Then Karelin started to kick the footprint with his boot, and again the footprint stood solid. At this point Karelin realized that the footprint was icy.

Another important thing is that Karelin started to watch his own footprints. No surprise, they transformed from indentations to raised footprints, but then they started to erode and were destroyed by strong wind within hours. I guess, when people say that raised footprints can stay for months, they talk about areas, which are not so windy as the 1079's spur. The major footprints destroyer is wind, and if it blows just occasionally, footprints might be safe for a long time. But it's not the case for the windy DP slope. Anyway, if I know correctly, nobody has managed to leave his footprints on the same slope in winter that would stay longer than few days. For example, KP reporter Natalia, who participated in eхpedition to DP in 2013, writes:

"This photo shows the tracks we left when we arrived at the pass. We walked across the snow cover in snowshoes. Two days later, we found the familiar columns in the same place. They had been blown away by the wind. The temperature during those days ranged from -28 C to -12 C. Now we know for sure that such tracks can form at low temperatures, and it doesn't matter what kind of prints they are — shoes or bare feet. But after a day, the tracks disappeared under the influence of the blizzard. How could the tracks left by the Dyatlov group's feet remain on the mountainside for almost a month, where there was constant snowstorms and wind?"

[Ziljoe]

You are taking an awful long time to get to the point of your own post.

You ask why icy.

Detailed explanation
Initial compression: When you step on snow, your foot compresses the snow, making it denser and harder than the surrounding snow. This compression can also cause a small amount of melting due to the pressure, and that tiny amount of water then refreezes, further solidifying the imprint.
Wind erosion: Over time, wind blows across the area. It carries away the loose, powdery snow on the surface, but the compressed, harder snow of the footprint is much more resistant to erosion.
Resulting raised relief: As the wind continues to blow, the surrounding snow gets lower and lower, leaving the original footprint as a raised track that can be several inches high.
Alternative: Meltwater and refreezing: Another scenario is when snow is wet or slushy, and stepping in it creates a print that is saturated with water. If this water then freezes, it can create a hard, icy print that will stand out when the rest of the snow melts away.

There is nothing mysterious about the raised footprints . Depending on conditions, they can last from a day to months . I have even seen this myself and so should any of these people that have enjoyed the outdoors . Either these people don't have outdoor experience or the articles are being written to make it sound unusual which is purely for sales.

However , if you think there is some other reason ,then please say so because no one can argue that raised footprints don't exist . They turn it ice by their own nature. There are ridges of stones sticking out of the snow every year as there was in 1959 and the ice field seems to be a natural occurrence as teddy mentions it and the searchers found got slippy after a few days being there. Which would mean the weather changed even post incident.

[Senior Maldonado]

You are taking an awful long time to get to the point of your own post.

Good point, I'll try to be short.

There is nothing mysterious about the raised footprints . Depending on conditions, they can last from a day to months . ... They turn it ice by their own nature. There are ridges of stones sticking out of the snow every year as there was in 1959 and the ice field seems to be a natural occurrence as teddy mentions it and the searchers found got slippy after a few days being there. Which would mean the weather changed even post incident.

Your stand is clear -- it is natural for footprints left on the slope of NE spur of 1079 in winter to get icy and to last for months. I presume that natural things cannot happen only once, they are repeatable. Could you please point me to at least one refference that somebody left footprints at THE SAME PLACE in Febraury, and the footprints were visible after 2 months?  Having such a refference I'll be more confident that it is a natural phenomenon, nothing else.

You suggest two options: footprints left in dry, powdery snow and footprints left in wet, slushy snow. Could you be more precise please? Do you think that all snow on the slope that day in 1959 was dry? Or wet? Or combination of dry and wet? Can you name weather conditions when the Dyatlov group desended the slope?

 

[Ziljoe]

Raised foot prints are a part of nature as shown in the link I supplied. Raised footprints are reported to be able to last for months in the right conditions.
We have raised footprints of the hikers found after 3 weeks in 1959. We have raised footprints from later hikers . ( How long those lasted I do not know).

I can not give you evidence of footprints on 1079 in later years because I don't think anyone stayed for two months on the slope plus the weather conditions would need to be correct as of 1959.

Raised foot prints are a natural phenomenon whether we like it or not. It's not even a debate or a contest . However , something else may have influenced the process and gave a similar result as I suspect you are trying to get at.

I feel your build up to some theory you are about to give relies on the raised footprints NOT being able to happen in nature, for a month anyway.

I can not answer any of your questions as to what the weather conditions were on that night . I would only work a model by what we see and what we think we know.  The raised footprints suggest a warm front and/or a fresh snow fall. The state of dress of the hikers also suggest that it wasn't on the colder side of expected temperatures . ( Sorry the options were given from Google) . I would guess it was dry at the time of tent erection but I am no authority on the matter.

[Axelrod]

The Komsomolskaya Pravda expedition left similar footprints, which they photographed the next day or the day after.

[WAB]

The Komsomolskaya Pravda expedition left similar footprints, which they photographed the next day or the day after.

This message reflects "all of Axelrod." He knows nothing, but he wants to show off his importance.
I wonder if this is a family trait or just a coincidence of behavior. Boris Slobtsov told me that Moisei Axelrod liked to fantasize more than was necessary...
Shura (Alexander Alekseenkov) and I photographed these tracks before the correspondents arrived at the pass by helicopter. Here's a link to our photos:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1bIRv5vlR05yDzWk40trAZZ0TyNdo9ofn?usp=sharing
We were at the pass four days before their arrival, and arrived there on skis, like ordinary travelers. I showed them the location of these tracks when the correspondents disembarked from the helicopter.
I'm very curious: will this case ever be studied with primary sources, rather than by those who write about it much more than they know about the subject?

[Senior Maldonado]

@WAB,

It is great to see you in this thread! Your expert knowledge is required badly to understand if it is natural for footprints on the 'Tent - Cedar tree' slope to keep their shape for 1.5-2 months. Have you ever witnessed footprints on the slope that lasted that long? Everybody says "yes, raised footprints are formed, but they are destroyed by harsh wind withing few days". Is that true?

[Senior Maldonado]

Raised foot prints are a natural phenomenon whether we like it or not. It's not even a debate or a contest . However , something else may have influenced the process and gave a similar result as I suspect you are trying to get at.

I feel your build up to some theory you are about to give relies on the raised footprints NOT being able to happen in nature, for a month anyway.

I can not answer any of your questions as to what the weather conditions were on that night . I would only work a model by what we see and what we think we know.  The raised footprints suggest a warm front and/or a fresh snow fall. The state of dress of the hikers also suggest that it wasn't on the colder side of expected temperatures . ( Sorry the options were given from Google) . I would guess it was dry at the time of tent erection but I am no authority on the matter.

Not only raised footprints, but also indented footprints are a natural phenomenon. No doubt that Nature started its work to form raised footprints as soon as the Dyatlov group has passed the slope. The question is whether Nature was reluctant to perform the last step of its work -- destroy the footprints quite quickly. Or maybe it tried to do that, but something prevented it from finishing the work. If we believe Karelin (i know, you don't), the Dyatlov group's footprints became icy, and that kept them safe. At the same time, Karelin's own footprints on the same slope during the same month of February did not get icy, and they were destroyed by Nature within days. I wonder, why the hiker's footprints became icy while Karelin's (and his friends') did not.

And I think we can rule out wet snow, when the hikers left their tent. Wet snow means temperatures not lower than -1C, and it impossible to receive frost bites of stages III and IV at such temperatures. Especially when people move actively and don't stay still.