That pesky footwear

[GlennM]

Does anyone have an idea of what footwear was used by each hiker prior to their ascent up the Auspiya? I assume that once they were on skis. They wore ski boots.

So what? Well. For me at least, it means that valenki were not carried by everyone. Instead, they necessarily brought their boots and socks. A pair of felt boots for anyone was a nice to have, not a need to have item.

So what? Well. When they left the tent, those having socks wore them, those with valenki wore them. Nobody took ski boots because nobody took skis.

So what? Well, skis were not used because they could not be gotten to. There was a tent over them. The rescue photo shows snow over a collapsed tent. That's more overburden. If you are going to scrape off snow from your tent, you are either going to re-erect the tent and carry on, or you are going to pack it all up and find better ground.

So what would prevent these options from happening? I think they couldn't get ahead of the wind and snow at the time, so no reconstruction and no packing up. I do think that if the tent was completely flattened, they could have propped up the ends of the tent on the ski poles in order to be able to find it again after they got warm and rested. Those who believe the Yuri's climbed the cedar to confirm the tent's location might like this idea.

They walked to the forest, dressed as they were, some better, some worse. These youth were toughies; sturdy Russian stock. They could wait out the conditions for a reasonable amount of time. However, the distance to the woods and the overall weather were two variables which changed the dynamic for survival.

So what? No conspirators or their traces were ever located and certainly not needed..  There is no demonstrable evidence the group was involuntarily routed from their shelter by malefactors. Therefore, the idea the hikers were deliberately force marched, dressed how they were dressed is a fantasy. They left with what they had because at the time the conditions did not permit fixing the tent. If you have ever been in such conditions and tried to fight against it, you would appreciate my thought..

Each person used what they had, or borrowed, to make the initial hike. When the situation got desperate, there was additional sharing and salvaging to insure survival against the cold.  It is reasonable to believe they initially packed conservatively and never planned to do anything other than carry what clothing they needed to hike and ski to Ortoten and home. There was never a plan for a group side hike a mile and back on a slope to the woods. They were not dressed for it. No crampons. They died because the weather conditions lasted longer than they could hold out against it. But did they make for the ravine first or the cedar? Its the difference between prioritizing shelter or warmth.

[TobiasLorenz]

I agree with the general line here: the footwear situation looks much more like improvisation under pressure than anything staged or controlled by outsiders. People tend to picture “leaving the tent” as a clean decision point, but in wind, darkness, spindrift, and a collapsed or half-collapsed tent, even finding and freeing the right boots could become unrealistic very fast.

On cedar vs ravine, I lean toward the cedar first, at least for part of the group. Fire and visibility make sense as immediate priorities: get below the wind, make heat, keep some reference to the tent if possible. The ravine feels more like the later, more organized attempt at shelter once it became clear the fire wasn’t enough. But I don’t think it had to be one single group decision; they may have split tasks quite early.

[Ramsay]

I'm not an expert on the subject, but I can say that there weren't any specialized shoes for mountaineering and high-performance skiing. You could find good handcrafted models, but this type of footwear was discontinued after the war and only reappeared in the 1980s when institutional adventure tourism grew. At that time, it was common to use leather boots. High-top models were uncomfortable, so work boots, reinforced winter boots, were adapted with leather straps to fit into the cable ski bindings. Valenki boots were good for use in camp and for resting the feet in extreme cold. Some also used canvas boots with rubber soles.

[GlennM]

Thanks guys for the replies.  What I am thinking about is that Igor's medical examination describes injury to his ankles. I got to thinking that if on the 31st, on their first attempt on Ortoten, he might have been a scout for the group. Sometime during that day I am thinking he may have turned (sprained) an ankle. That would explain nicely him leaving his ski boots at the labaz. It also fits nicely with the group getting a late start and an early camp, again because he was hurt.

Where I get bogged down when the hikers abandoned the tent. I think it would make perfect sense for Igor to make use of a ski pole to help him down hill with all the others. Consequently, I expect that the trail from tent to forest would be punctuated with stabs from his ski pole all the way down. The case files do not have that finding. I do note that he was not well fitted with footwear when he was found.

Then again, instead of a ski pole perhaps an actual ski as a crutch was used.  I seem to recall there was some mention of a ski either on the slope or the forest. It does not prove anything, but it is interesting.

There was also some discussion about a leg wrapping being found down in the woods. Anything to immobilize a bad ankle would be to the good. Igor was also carrying Spectracide, an anti inflammatory medication.

Igor was found to be grasping a branch in his arms when his body was found. I can believe he was holding that branch to block  an icy blast to his face. I can believe he was thinking of laying three set of branches in the snow as a distress signal to aircraft. I have a hard tine thinking an unstripped branch made any useful sort of crutch.

All of this reasoning goes back to the fact that on their last day, the DP9 did not cover as much ground to Ortoten as I might expect.  From that I reason that the group is going to move as fast as the slowest member. I am not aware of any other member having a leg injury that would slow the hiking party down. Again, this is a speculative answer, but it does knit some things together. It also highlights how a single accident or injury can throw the dynamic of the hiking expedition off of a thought out plan and replaced by a modified/improvised one.

[Osi]

I believe the group preferred using skis at every stage of the trek—even in the most grueling conditions. Sending a scout ahead to break a trail had become a tedious and exhausting chore; traversing the slopes on skis was the better option. Skis and boots are heavy to carry, and boots tend to get damp and cold. A few people with cold feet inside the tent might have been wearing *valenki* (felt boots). Perhaps Rüstem, too, would have put them on and promptly gone to sleep. I am of the opinion that, within the forest, the division of labor prioritized the fire. They had even considered the possibility that the fire might fail to light.

[bongyi]

The question is, how deep was the snow at the bottom of the slope?  Anyone who has already been torn into waist-deep snow understands that the snow would immediately pull the socks off their feet!

[Osi]

Regarding Gleen: In cases of hypothermia and death by freezing, it has been observed that most victims breathed their last in sheltered spots—such as against a wall, beneath a bench, or at the base of a tree. This reflects a primal instinct where consciousness attempts to protect the body. Consciousness does not concern itself with whether a branch can actually shield the body from the cold; it simply tries to use it as a covering. As Igor succumbed to hypothermia, he too took shelter at the base of that tree and tried to cover his face and chest with its branches. Due to the lack of standardization in the skis and boots of the 1950s, skiers had to use extra cords to secure their boots and ankles to the skis to ensure a snug fit; the scars on his ankles are directly attributable to this. If you were to wedge a shoelace between your shoe and your foot and walk all day, you would find your feet injured along the line where that cord pressed against them.

[GlennM]

Osi. I like your thoughts on the ski bindings. If you have additional insight on the skis and their use, please add to it.  Appreciated.

[Hunter]

At that time, tourists used both ski boots (somewhat larger, to accommodate thick wool socks) and valenki (felt boots)—felt footwear worn in winter. To protect their valenki in towns and villages, they wore galoshes—a type of rubber shoe—and on hikes, they wore covers, also known as shoe covers or chuni (shoe covers)—covers typically made of canvas, either rectangular or L-shaped. Depending on sewing skills and access to materials, these could have elastic bands, sewn-in laces, or simply be wrapped with rope along the entire length, as seen in the photographs from the hike.

[Osi]

Glenn, I don't have extensive knowledge about skiing and its equipment, but I have had plenty of experience with the injuries caused by non-standard gear during long treks. When it comes to long-distance hiking, the most vulnerable areas are the front of the neck, behind the ears, the tops and soles of the feet, and the Achilles tendons. Therefore, the wounds and abrasions found on the victims in these specific areas might not necessarily indicate violence; the culprit could be anything from the icy edge of a hat or a tight cord wrapped around the wrist to a simple matchstick inside a shoe.