Snow around the tent

[amashilu]

Atmanaki:
”There were no footprints right around the tent because when the Dyatlov group dug they had stacked the snow all around, and later this snow was drifted by the wind, thus covering all the tracks..”

So what does this mean exactly? I understand that they dug out a kind of flat trench for the purpose of creating a level space to lay their skiis down and position the tent on top. But all the snow they dug out, they now stacked around the tent. What effect would this stacked snow have on a slab slip? Would there be enough stacked snow to block a slab slip? GlennM, this one's for you. I'm not familiar with stacking snow around a tent.

[Ziljoe]

From another hike but the dug hole is for a snow hole.

[GlennM]

There two things of note. First it the excavated snow covered the prints at the tent, this reinforces the scouring power of the wind. In fact the wind was so strong that one rescuer noted his hand held ski pole was blown horizontally by the wind.

Second, the L cut may have sliced through layers of snow, like layers in a cake, wind driven snow built up as the flow was obstructed by the tent. When it got too heavy enough, just like icing between layers of cake, the top layer slid over the tent, collapsing the middle and back, and creating a condition where the center section could not be re erected. With the tent blown down and covered in a heavy wind, the reasonable option was to clear our and bug out. It should have been a quick there and back to the woods, but that depended on an uncooperative Russian winter.

[amashilu]

Yes, I understand what a slab slip is and how it works. But what I'm asking is, how would the stacked snow affect such a slip, especially if there was a whole lot of stacked snow.

[GlennM]

It would accelerate shearing due to the combined effects of wind resistance and vertical compression on upper snow layer of the 30 degree slope adjacent to the broadside of the tent

Simply put, they piled stuff up and wind and gravity pushed it back on them.

[amashilu]

It would accelerate shearing due to the combined effects of wind resistance and vertical compression on upper snow layer of the 30 degree slope adjacent to the broadside of the tent

Simply put, they piled stuff up and wind and gravity pushed it back on them.

Okay, thank you.

[amashilu]

Just for the sake of discussion, let's put ourselves in the hikers' situation and imagine that a slab slip has happened at the tent. They have all exited the tent and are now standing there looking at it, assessing the situation and talking about what they should do. Meanwhile, their feet are freezing and the wind is whipping their faces.



Do you believe that they would all agree -- all nine of them -- (and it would not be easy to get nine people to agree to a proposal that poses serious danger to their very lives) -- that turning away and walking a mile without even trying to retrieve their shoes and jackets is the smart thing to do?

It seems actually pretty obvious that what would prevail is a proposal that they get to work immediately to pull enough snow off the tent to allow them to get inside and retrieve necessary clothing and safety equipment.

[Senior Maldonado]

My bet is that when the hikers escaped partially collapsed tent and gathered in front of it, they recognized a threat that was much more stronger than 2nd snow slab. But even facing that threat they did not intend to go straight to the forest a mile downhill. Their initial intention was to retreat 400-500 meters and wait till the threat was over. Then return back and restore the tent. But when they reached the 3rd stone ridge, they understood that the threat was not short-term, and they had nothing better than to proceed to the forest - the nearest shelter.

[amashilu]

My bet is that when the hikers escaped partially collapsed tent and gathered in front of it, they recognized a threat that was much more stronger than 2nd snow slab. But even facing that threat they did not intend to go straight to the forest a mile downhill. Their initial intention was to retreat 400-500 meters and wait till the threat was over. Then return back and restore the tent. But when they reached the 3rd stone ridge, they understood that the threat was not short-term, and they had nothing better than to proceed to the forest - the nearest shelter.

That is plausible — an immediate, greater threat.

[GlennM]

Logical, not plausible. Plausibility demands evidence,eyewitness, physical, circumstantial. Then, it is just a matter of working out a sequence.. None exist to support a hybrid Nature-Malevalent explanation. Instead, the exercise takes what is real and known, Nature and adds an additional threat by imagined bad actors, 2 or 4 legged, things falling from the sky and so on  to explain the inconvenient things like state of dress/ undress, supplies at hand etc.

The hybrid idea is a conspirator using a flashlight to communicate with another conspirator with a flashlight, then persuading 8 adults to cut up a perfectly good tent, in order to step lively into the thin woods. The conspirator at the tent does not escape, but joins the victims marching downhill,miraculously levitating so as not to leave footprints, follows. Both leave their communicating devices for later discovery.I could go in, but this is nonsense in stilts.

[amashilu]

Logical, not plausible. Plausibility demands evidence,eyewitness, physical, circumstantial. Then, it is just a matter of working out a sequence.. None exist to support a hybrid Nature-Malevalent explanation. Instead, the exercise takes what is real and known, Nature and adds an additional threat by imagined bad actors, 2 or 4 legged, things falling from the sky and so on  to explain the inconvenient things like state of dress/ undress, supplies at hand etc.

When there is information missing and you don't know what happened, it is wise to keep an open mind.

[GlennM]

I agree. I am grateful that Teddy has undertaken numerous expeditions to the Urals, to obtain facts and insights that help us with our proposals in the Forum. I hope it does not become a "pay to play" situation though.

[amashilu]

I agree. I am grateful that Teddy has undertaken numerous expeditions to the Urals, to obtain facts and insights that help us with our proposals in the Forum. I hope it does not become a "pay to play" situation though.

Not sure how you think this would happen?

[Hunter]

The question is, what were they afraid of? The tracks we've recorded indicate a walking retreat, not a run. And if there's danger, they usually run. They don't run, but walk, only in rare cases, and even then, they walk backwards to see if there's danger.

[amashilu]

The question is, what were they afraid of? The tracks we've recorded indicate a walking retreat, not a run. And if there's danger, they usually run. They don't run, but walk, only in rare cases, and even then, they walk backwards to see if there's danger.

Wow, that's a relief. I was beginning to think I had failed to make my question clear:  that I was asking about the strange contrast between an urgent, immediate evacuation from the tent, followed by a calm, orderly descent. So yes, what were they so afraid of that not only did they cut their survival shelter, but Slobodin didn't even grab his second boot?
 And then they walked calmly? And if they walked calmly, were they calm? If they were calm, why didn't they go back to the tent, six feet away, and dig for their jackets and shoes?

I am beginning to doubt that they are the ones who cut the tent.

[Senior Maldonado]

I am beginning to doubt that they are the ones who cut the tent.

Cutting the tent to jump out rapidly and not taking ammunition is a good match. Leaving the tent thru the standard exit and not taking ammunition looks unlikely.

[amashilu]

Cutting the tent to jump out rapidly and not taking ammunition is a good match. Leaving the tent thru the standard exit and not taking ammunition looks unlikely.

Ammunition?

[Senior Maldonado]

Maybe, I am not correct saying it in english. I meant warm outwear, tools, medical kit.

[amashilu]

Maybe, I am not correct saying it in english. I meant warm outwear, tools, medical kit.

Ah, you mean supplies.

I'm not sure I agree. If you wanted to bring your shoes or a first-aid kit, you could do it through the tent cut.

[Hunter]

For me, everything seems strange in general - I can’t find a logical explanation that would explain the cutting of the tent, leaving it in whatever it was, and calmly retreating down.

[amashilu]

For me, everything seems strange in general - I can’t find a logical explanation that would explain the cutting of the tent, leaving it in whatever it was, and calmly retreating down.

I agree.
We should just be bold and abandon the idea.

[GlennM]

I feel the missing factor is being smothered under a collapsed tent. It might seem amusing at first, but in short order the pressure on them and the used up air call for urgent action. Once outside and able to breathe freely, there is no need to run. In fact, running and sweating has a dangerous consequence when the moisture cools.

Nine people in close quarters are not going to single file it like so many eels through the front flap. With the weight of snow pressing them down in the dark. No, just find the canvas by feel and cut through it.

Why not go back and get stuff? Have you ever tried digging a hole in sand? It keeps backfilling. We do not have an idea of the amount of overburden on the collapsed tent, but if it took an hour to dig out everything needed it might have saved lives, or not. They could have cut up the tent for shawls too, but that would be the end of their grade 3 quest. Zolo certainly couldn't afford the delay. The situation as I understand it was that there was a crush of snow on the tent, in part wind driven. The outside support structures holding up the middle of the tent were useless, if they could be gathered. Why? The tent was sliced open by then.

My personal belief is they realized the futility of remaining in the bitter cold at the tent. Getting all their clothes on means they all get colder while only a couple benefit. I reason that the flashlight was to help the holder see where his/ her feet were going instead of searching out the tree line. I imagine a night time white out blizzard. They may have estimated the distance to the woods, but that was of no consequence. They had to make fire, period!  Therefore whatever the distance, they had to go, the sooner the better. Because they were moving by feel as much as sight, there was no running, but there was physical linking for mutual protection and orientation. Beyond that immediate reaction, all the rest is the result of a failure to keep a sustained heat source going.

[Hunter]

According to the log's description of the tent's contents, they abandoned it while the group was still awake. Therefore, they wouldn't have missed the snow accumulation. Furthermore, the searchers found no remains of the snow-brick wall.

[Ziljoe]

Perhaps something like what was expected by the searchers.