Help me get to the bottom of this

[GlennM]

Mr. Askindazi states in his 100 question session that a cut pair of snow pants were found in the snow near the two sapling firs with tops cut off. Those cut trees, pants and pine needle debris caused rescuers to dig down following pine needles. They found the den and eventually the R4. We assume the mat which was built on the streambank was constructed by the hikers and padded with their garments.

The pants and the depth of the mat below puzzle me.How do we sequence things?

The mat
The snow covering the mat
The demise of the Yuri's
The undressing of the deceased
The cutting of fir tips
The needle embedded ib snow
The undisturbed consolidated snow the rescuers dug through.

Are the trousers and den actually linked?

Are we looking at this wrong? Did R4 tunnel along the stream to the mat and not top down?

Was the mat made or a natural deposit? Did Mansi make it or R4?

Could it be that the vertical " trail" of pine needles had nothing to do with anything, Was it windblown forest duff?

The importance of the den is that instead of providing warmth from a fire, it stood to prevent body heat loss from frigid wind scour.  It seems too well made and too long to make  to not have has a  hand warming fire nearby.

I was not there. If I was, I might conclude the R4 the den and the pants are not linked to each other at all.

[Ziljoe]

Good questions . My take is that they are all linked. The den flooring would be to stop or minimise heat loss through the ground , same as the fir under a tent floor or a modern day air mat. The trousers and the pine needle trail make a logical debris trail and this is what is a negative to blasts , explosions and multiple outsiders, there also be a debris in that area, broken branches , twigs and pine needles would stick out like a sore thumb at the same level of snow during the thaw . There was no other trail or foliage on that layer of snow reported.

[GlennM]

Ziljoe, yet when the rescue team excavated the den, they remarked and photographed packed snow. Admittedly,  when widening the area around the den, they could have obliterated the actual disturbed snow. I would think that any vertical excavation, even if collapsed later inr time would make a surface depression. This begs two questions, with what tool did the R4 use to get 9 feet deep in snow when rescuers were cutting and shovelling cubic foot snow blocks? I think leaving snow pants on the open ground would only serve to point to an entry hole should the R4 climb in and out for some reason. Was that it? Seems wasteful then sticks are all around.


Since recovery ohotos show the R4 group nearer to a potential second exit, could it be they dug along the stream to make a crawl through tunnel and in doing so create an L shaped design with both vertical and lateral vents for the den? I can only imagine their justification for that kind of energy expenditure was for body heat diring construction and later fire heat at the mat.

If that were the case, it would do much to explain crushing injuries on the diggers and none on their would be rescuers.

[sarapuk]

Mr. Ashkenazi states in his 100 question session that a cut pair of snow pants were found in the snow near the two sapling firs with tops cut off. Those cut trees, pants and pine needle debris caused rescuers to dig down following pine needles. They found the den and eventually the R4. We assume the mat which was built on the streambank was constructed by the hikers and padded with their garments.

The pants and the depth of the mat below puzzle me.How do we sequence things?

The mat
The snow covering the mat
The demise of the Yuri's
The undressing of the deceased
The cutting of fir tips
The needle embedded ib snow
The undisturbed consolidated snow the rescuers dug through.

Are the trousers and den actually linked?

Are we looking at this wrong? Did R4 tunnel along the stream to the mat and not top down?

Was the mat made or a natural deposit? Did Mansi make it or R4?

Could it be that the vertical " trail" of pine needles had nothing to do with anything, Was it windblown forest duff?

The importance of the den is that instead of providing warmth from a fire, it stood to prevent body heat loss from frigid wind scour.  It seems too well made and too long to make  to not have has a  hand warming fire nearby.

I was not there. If I was, I might conclude the R4 the den and the pants are not linked to each other at all.

The trail led the searchers to the location of the so-called den. So it figures that the so-called den was made by the group or some of the group and not the Mansi or anyone else. Unless we are missing something.

[GlennM]

Yes, as a matter of record that is what happened. The reason why it is troublesome is that the pants, branches and twigs were there all along, yet nobody thought to dig the snow. Why? Other than the pants, there was nothing about the snow to shout "dig here" Too, if we recall the whole search was actually delayed for a time. Are we to asume those ski pants were not discovered when the Yuris were? Surely they must have been as obvious as the bodies were.

Keen eyed Mansi thought the twigs might be a trail, then a gradient. They dug,  but was the digging  through disturbed or undisturbed snow? Wouldn't  you think the hikers would have created a gopher mound of excavated snow if they dug down? I do! Further, wouldn't any sane searcher stop digging after just a few feet because the hikers had only been lost a matter of weeks, not seasons?

It seems so very odd that the snow pants, the den and the R4 corpses are where they were. It was clever to dig down. It was clever to probe for bodies.

I am more inclined to believe that finding the den the way they did was just luck. It seems more likely to me that the R4 and possibly IRZ all tunneled in along the stream and not down to it in order to make that mat of branches.

If it,wasn't for the ripped garments on the mat, I'd say the mat was a seasonal Mansi shelter having no bearing on the findings of the R4.

[GlennM]

Ziljoe: Is there anything about the search that you have never been asked, but feel is important to say?

Askinadzi: Since I was constantly critical of the search strategy and tactics, how would I have organized the search if I had been in Maslennikov's shoes? The search team's first meeting in a hotel room in Ivdel revealed the organizers' helplessness. Their main mistake was their desire to immediately find the Dyatlov group, allowing the initial picture of the camp's condition, even in the tent area, to be destroyed in the first few days without documenting it. As an investigator, Tempalov was obliged to explain how the investigative actions began — it was his professional duty. As a result, the initial state of the scene was reconstructed from fragmentary recollections of the participants, and this until the very end of the search. We had only word of mouth.

This comment is quite revealing.  It means that we all  construct theories in the absence of definitive first hand records of the initial untouched discoveries. We have people who discount the slab slide theory, but the snow was moved. We have people who believe wild animals or burned celluloid film was to blame, but the tent was aired out. We have only a suggestion that loose debris was retrieved, but nothing to speak to anything that might have been buried underfoot at the time. We make a big deal about the cuts in the tent, but this was affected by rescuers cutting into the tent. Why do that anyway? If the tent wasn't collapsed, then just raise the flap at the end of the tent.

It is small wonder we get tied up in the forum with things that do not seem to fit. Even the eyewitnesses back then were going on here say. Askelrod never checked the Otorten mailbox to find out if anyone actually made it. Sigh!

[ilahiyol]

In my opinion, there can only be one reason why the 4 Rs would dig such a large snow cave with such great effort! Because digging this cave must be quite difficult for 3 men and 1 woman. Digging through a 2.5-meter-high snowdrift in pitch darkness at -20 degrees Celsius could only be to hide from danger!!! So, the 4 Rs dug that snow cave to hide from an unknown, compelling force! Most likely, there were much smaller snowdrifts around that could have been dug. Also, why are there no photos of this place before it was dug up??? If there were, the event could be explained much more logically.

[SURI]

So, the 4 Rs dug that snow cave to hide from an unknown, compelling force!

No one hides from themselves.

[GlennM]

As I see it there are a number of explanations for the mat of branches in the ravine. I suggert the possibilities are:
1. Naturally formed debris  before any clothing was overlaid
2.Mansi constructed hunting rest spot before any clothing was overlaid
3. R4 comstruction requiring testimony regarding matching materials and knife cuts to surrounding foliage

If option 3 , then how do we explain the trail of twigs leading to it?
A. If the site of the branch mat was exposed in February and subsequently covered by snow, then there would be no digging through surface snow in February to comstruct the mat. It would be drag and drop. The ledge and the adjascent creek would be visible ,thus avoiding building a mat on water.
B. If the discovery reports are correct, then not only was the surface snow dug through (sans tools) to reach the creek bed but the branches and clothes had to be dragged down and laid is shape.

If B. Then wouldn't digging down in the snow in order to make a ground level mat of branches constitute a snow cave in and of itself?  Further, if this was what actually happened, then getting in and out of the den would disturb the surrounding snowbanks,  The opinion of the rescue party was that the snow they, the rescuers dug through was not disturbed. Alternately, it was in fact previously worked, but nobody thought it important.

If the hikers intended to return to their tent after taking cover in the ravine, can we seriously believe they would lay on their backs and kick a hole in snow from where they were found to the mat? Could they have kicked snow from the mat to where they were found?  If so, then did the arch they made collapse and crush them? That suggests a very considerable overburden of snow which is loose enough to compress by kicking but solid enough not to mimic excavating a hole in loose sand.