December 12, 2019, 02:23:23 PM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: Soviet military  (Read 4769 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

February 09, 2019, 01:04:14 PM
Read 4769 times
Offline

GlennM


I submit there is no compelling evidence that a ground based threat would compel 9 intelligent people to cut and ruin a tent, escaping into a very likely death sentence before reconsidering, and turning around. Only the spectre  of immediate obliteration would make abandoning the tent the right action to take.  I do believe an aerial threat would. Suppose a squadron if Soviet fighters practicing night training at low altitude produced a deafening roar right over the tent. The hikers knowing they themselves were off course would not think twice about clearing the area. If the Jets also dropped flares as training munitions, the bright light and noise would panic them. No time to dress, time to go! Ear shattering noise, bright tent piercing light of flares and the real possibility of certain destruction made them leave without hesitation.

after passing the point of no return, but still without the cover of trees and in a calmer state if mind, they reason that making a fire in the woods will serve two ends, one is warmth, the other a light in the dark. It would be too cold to return unless they could warm up first. Everything is numbing up.Some may have tripped and got hurt on the way down.

Realizing that the Jets are gone, not to return, a decision is made to form teams. Three go back to the tent and get supplies. The rest to make shelter and wait.

The returning hikers can't  make the trip, and sleep as they shut down, falling along the way.

Two die by the fire from injury and exposure coming down the hill or at the tree.  The others take clothes and seek deeper snow to dig in. They want a snow cave for the night. They fall into the ravine and succumb.

The Cold War Soviets would not reveal where they fly to train or test ground detection technology. That invites spying. They have no obligation to associate  training activity with the hikers. This invites spying. By comparison, stealth aircraft at Area 51 are flown at night to further remote areas for flight tests. Too many observers around if testing is done too close to home.

I think it will ultimately be revealed that the hikers were unwitting victims of the Cold War. They will eventually be honored as heros of the State. That will close the investigation.

February 09, 2019, 05:03:52 PM
Reply #1
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
I submit there is no compelling evidence that a ground based threat would compel 9 intelligent people to cut and ruin a tent, escaping into a very likely death sentence before reconsidering, and turning around. Only the spectre  of immediate obliteration would make abandoning the tent the right action to take.  I do believe an aerial threat would. Suppose a squadron if Soviet fighters practicing night training at low altitude produced a deafening roar right over the tent. The hikers knowing they themselves were off course would not think twice about clearing the area. If the Jets also dropped flares as training munitions, the bright light and noise would panic them. No time to dress, time to go! Ear shattering noise, bright tent piercing light of flares and the real possibility of certain destruction made them leave without hesitation.

after passing the point of no return, but still without the cover of trees and in a calmer state if mind, they reason that making a fire in the woods will serve two ends, one is warmth, the other a light in the dark. It would be too cold to return unless they could warm up first. Everything is numbing up.Some may have tripped and got hurt on the way down.

Realizing that the Jets are gone, not to return, a decision is made to form teams. Three go back to the tent and get supplies. The rest to make shelter and wait.

The returning hikers can't  make the trip, and sleep as they shut down, falling along the way.

Two die by the fire from injury and exposure coming down the hill or at the tree.  The others take clothes and seek deeper snow to dig in. They want a snow cave for the night. They fall into the ravine and succumb.

The Cold War Soviets would not reveal where they fly to train or test ground detection technology. That invites spying. They have no obligation to associate  training activity with the hikers. This invites spying. By comparison, stealth aircraft at Area 51 are flown at night to further remote areas for flight tests. Too many observers around if testing is done too close to home.

I think it will ultimately be revealed that the hikers were unwitting victims of the Cold War. They will eventually be honored as heros of the State. That will close the investigation.

Thats fair enough that you suggest it could be an aerial threat that caused the Dyatlov Group to leave the Tent, but what about the various actions after leaving the Tent and the various very serious injuries  !  ?  How does DUBININA end up with those extraordinary injuries. Etc.
DB

February 09, 2019, 05:08:37 PM
Reply #2
Offline

Marchesk


The returning hikers can't  make the trip, and sleep as they shut down, falling along the way.

I don't get that. Either they were too weak to make the trip because they waited long enough for hypothermia to set in, or they should have been able to make it back to the tent. If they waited a couple hours, then it makes no sense to go back uphill exposed to the wind in a weakened state.

Otherwise, I agree that they could have been scared out of their tent by a military exercise. I wonder if the higher ups knew or found out about that, and the decision was to cover it up by forcing the criminal part of the investigation to stop.

February 09, 2019, 08:33:16 PM
Reply #3
Offline

GlennM


Hello and thanks for the post.

Any of the deceased will decompose according to the environmental conditions where they died. To me, that is a distraction and peripheral to the central issue. I think the injuries are consistent with falling. Where and when are also peripheral considerations. Secondly, it seems reasonable that once the hikers resolved to travel all the way to the edge of the forest, they would all be in need of heat. The reason for not returning to camp after departure was , I believe for a warm fire and to be certain the aerial threat was over. Who is to say if those jets were going to test bombs or bomb sights? I believe that the eventual decision to have a team try to get back to the tent was a heroism since the team leader was in that group. It might have taken 30 minutes to get down hill,but going uphill is something else altogether. I imagine the time doubled.  I also believe there was no other choice than to try to return. The idea would be for three to get back to camp, load food clothes and ski down to rapidly bring relief to those at the tree or digging a snow cave. I think the return party was as determined as anyone with a death sentence on them can be. No one stopped and none turned back. Finally, going back to original motivations, I believe the Russians hikers knew that if they got killed by an airstrike or a vibration induced snowslide, the military would suppress involvement for State security. Therefore, their best strategy was to get out of harm's way and hope for the best. It the dilemma of choosing the devil or the deep as they say. A cold night in the Cold War.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2019, 09:23:53 PM by GlennM »

February 10, 2019, 12:07:56 AM
Reply #4
Offline

Loose}{Cannon

Global Moderator
Welp, we have reason to suspect they never 'cut' their way out of the tent to begin with.  Also, there were other student groups in the area from the same school that undoubtedly would have heard and reported hearing fighter jets or similar.   I know all to well the sound you speak of and it travels for many miles. 
All theories are flawed.......    Get Behind Me Satan !!!

February 10, 2019, 12:39:43 AM
Reply #5
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
I don't think low flying aircraft on military exercise is enough to cause them to panic and flee without their shoes.  Even if they were worried the py would have at lest collected some important life saving gear and put their shoes on.

What caused them to leave was compelling and happened quickly.  It caused immediate distress, or they fled from someone/something.

February 10, 2019, 07:57:10 AM
Reply #6
Offline

GlennM


Hello,

I find it important to consider the tent was opened on the down hill side. I find it curious that matches or Flint was brought along to start a fire. I doubt anyone could rub sticks after the exposure to cold. I find it curious that if knives (weapons?) were used to cut the tent, knives were unreported with corpses. I think it is a distraction to the central idea. Knives were handy, shoes were not.They cut themselves out of the tent in a desparate bid to live.. I believe that if a jet flys by 200 feet from you, the reaction is different than if the jet is 2 miles from you. From inside a tent you don't know if it is passing or crashing, it is loud, close and a threat. Nothing on the ground would provoke the threat response to leave shelter and eventually try to return. A perceived air strike or jet exhaust ground shock precipitating a snow slide would. Of course it is easy to say that Soviet intelligence quashed testimony from other hikers, I think if any group was buzzed by a MIG, they would bug out too if they were on a bare hillside in the Cold War.

I too find it difficult to understand how anyone would destroy shelter and leave without shoes.You have to find them, put them on in the dark and get bundled up. No time! The only plausible answer is immediate threat of death. Nothing on the ground would provoke that response. The hikers made a snap decision out of fear of certain destruction. Being shot covered in a snow slide or bombed is sufficient motivation. They head to the trees and wait it out. The rest unfolds as it did in the reports.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2019, 08:21:10 AM by GlennM »

February 10, 2019, 08:52:36 AM
Reply #7
Offline

gypsy


I find it very unlikely that the threat was indeed a fighter jet. At that time, these were not at all used or equiped for ground attacks and there is no point to fly those at low altitude in the mountains. Apart from that, it would be too loud and too visible in much bigger area.

Nevertheless, it is still possible that military or intelligence were involved in the events that led to deaths of the tourists. As I wrote already in other thread, it is possible that they were using some kind of home-made radio equipment (there are references such as "Sasha Kolevatov tested his device, then quit" or "tins and wires" inside the tent) and at least two of the group must have been familiar with radio technology.

There is a possiblity that they broadcasted something that was intercepted by the secret service or they overheard some sensitive communication. It cannot be proved or disproved until the origin and function of "the device" and "tins and wires" found in the tent is clarified.

If the military was present, they would most likely used helicopters and it would be a rational decision to hide from them in the woods. Also, it would explain the absence of other footprints...but there is still a lot to explain.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2019, 10:16:32 AM by gypsy »

February 10, 2019, 09:36:45 AM
Reply #8
Offline

Loose}{Cannon

Global Moderator
Hello,

I find it important to consider the tent was opened on the down hill side. I find it curious that matches or Flint was brought along to start a fire. I doubt anyone could rub sticks after the exposure to cold. I find it curious that if knives (weapons?) were used to cut the tent, knives were unreported with corpses. I think it is a distraction to the central idea. Knives were handy, shoes were not.They cut themselves out of the tent in a desparate bid to live.. I believe that if a jet flys by 200 feet from you, the reaction is different than if the jet is 2 miles from you. From inside a tent you don't know if it is passing or crashing, it is loud, close and a threat. Nothing on the ground would provoke the threat response to leave shelter and eventually try to return. A perceived air strike or jet exhaust ground shock precipitating a snow slide would. Of course it is easy to say that Soviet intelligence quashed testimony from other hikers, I think if any group was buzzed by a MIG, they would bug out too if they were on a bare hillside in the Cold War.

I too find it difficult to understand how anyone would destroy shelter and leave without shoes.You have to find them, put them on in the dark and get bundled up. No time! The only plausible answer is immediate threat of death. Nothing on the ground would provoke that response. The hikers made a snap decision out of fear of certain destruction. Being shot covered in a snow slide or bombed is sufficient motivation. They head to the trees and wait it out. The rest unfolds as it did in the reports.

They had.... matches. 
All theories are flawed.......    Get Behind Me Satan !!!

February 10, 2019, 10:11:15 AM
Reply #9
Offline

varuna


Interesting view.
Jet fighers at low altitude at night in 59 in mountains , i do not take that either .
But the reason to leave the tnet without shoes for trained hikers ?
Either all the "evidence " is a fake , they had been taken by surprise, out of the end brutally , ans maybe they had fought back - wounds could confirm for some - and force to walk .
Clearly in this case ot would have been an organised action, goal, purpose,reason
Or all the "facts" are true and the level of coïncidence is very high : frighten at night ( by what) , falling from trees, hiding in the wrong place , missing the way back ..
a solid groupe with  technical habilites , good hikers in a hard time ?
One more question : did they take the wrong way or the way the were supposed to ?
le luxe c'est l'eau chaude ( former swiss colonel)
( luxury is hot water)

February 10, 2019, 10:27:44 AM
Reply #10
Offline

gypsy



But the reason to leave the tnet without shoes for trained hikers ?
Either all the "evidence " is a fake , they had been taken by surprise, out of the end brutally , ans maybe they had fought back - wounds could confirm for some - and force to walk .

On the balance of probability, somebody had a very good leverage on them. There is no way anybody would do that voluntarily. I would not do that unless a person with let's say AK47 and serious attitude told me to...

February 10, 2019, 11:08:27 AM
Reply #11
Offline

varuna


That is th point i was talking about . 
BUT in this case all the "evidence" is  build :
- tracks of the agressors
-the tent
-the place of the bodies
and so on
and no serious construction has to be made with it
le luxe c'est l'eau chaude ( former swiss colonel)
( luxury is hot water)

February 10, 2019, 12:04:50 PM
Reply #12
Offline

gypsy


The problem is, even if we explain leaving the tent by forced action (held at gunpoint or somebody taken hostage to control others) there are other questions that emerge.

- tracks of the agressors - if the agressors were indeed soviet military, they would be careful enough not to leave traces (could have arrived by helicopter for example and never leave the tent area, which was flattened before, on foot)
- the tent - inconclusive evidence, could have been cut by anybody either from inside or outside, we have no way to know if something was taken from the inside
- the place of the bodies - inconclusive, we have no idea if they were moved or somehow manipulated with (to take clothes for example)

Anyway, leaving somebody to die from freezing in russian winter is a good way to cover up foul play, but then the question stands why was not everybody killed by hypothermia and why were Thibeaux and Semyon dressed better than the others...

If we would assume there was nobody else present, again, on the balance of probability, if we rule out people ony by one, Semyon and Thibaux would be the ones to suspect. Or they were just somewhere else when all went wrong.

The lack of evidence leaves too much room for speculation, I can myself come up with other theories that are consistent with the KNOWN evidence but they are far-fetched at best...

February 10, 2019, 12:57:22 PM
Reply #13
Offline

GlennM


Very enjoyable forum, intelligent and civil discourse.

 I think that only a jet provides the necessary motivation. For any other alternatives, there would be time to negotiate or stand and fight. Further, if the hikers were force marched off site, it does not stand to reason they would be allowed to have a fire or attempt a return. The aggressors surely would not allow boots to remain at camp. A radio transmission is interesting, as is the possibility of a ground assault. I do not know if radio transmitters were outlawed, nor do  I know their weight and range. Least of all I don't know who they would contact. Since the group were to return to civilization and since the hike was done for points or credit, it becomes very complex, yes?

A low level night training mission fills the requirement for suddenness, threat of great harm, and immediacy for escape.
The fleeing hikers would have to repeat to themselves,"let's get out of here" over and over, or one would say" stop, let's go back, this is crazy!"

I enjoy the dialogue and critical thinking in the forum. Now that Russia is back in the investigation, won't it be exciting to know the truth?


February 10, 2019, 01:05:32 PM
Reply #14
Offline

Puchiko


The problem is, even if we explain leaving the tent by forced action (held at gunpoint or somebody taken hostage to control others) there are other questions that emerge.

- tracks of the agressors - if the agressors were indeed soviet military, they would be careful enough not to leave traces (could have arrived by helicopter for example and never leave the tent area, which was flattened before, on foot)
- the tent - inconclusive evidence, could have been cut by anybody either from inside or outside, we have no way to know if something was taken from the inside
- the place of the bodies - inconclusive, we have no idea if they were moved or somehow manipulated with (to take clothes for example)

Anyway, leaving somebody to die from freezing in russian winter is a good way to cover up foul play, but then the question stands why was not everybody killed by hypothermia and why were Thibeaux and Semyon dressed better than the others...

If we would assume there was nobody else present, again, on the balance of probability, if we rule out people ony by one, Semyon and Thibaux would be the ones to suspect. Or they were just somewhere else when all went wrong.

The lack of evidence leaves too much room for speculation, I can myself come up with other theories that are consistent with the KNOWN evidence but they are far-fetched at best...

I agree. I also think that if the Soviet military or KGB wanted to kill them and make it look like an accident, they would have just cleaned up and burned all the bodies and their belongings at a special facility. Tourists disappear in the mountains all the time and although there's the occasional "alien abduction" theory from that, it doesn't generate anything near the level of curiosity that the Dyatlov pass does. The Soviets were good at cover ups - the mess at Dyatlov pass just doesn't seem to fit that.

The "accidental collateral damage by arms testing" theory makes a bit more sense, but there's also evidence to contradict it - for instance, a parachute bomb could explain the injuries of the Ravine Four but an explosion of that magnitude would surely leave other marks of impact at the scene that just aren't there.

February 10, 2019, 01:37:43 PM
Reply #15
Offline

gypsy


I do not know if radio transmitters were outlawed, nor do  I know their weight and range. Least of all I don't know who they would contact.

There is an interesting document about radio-amateurism in USSR. At pages 13-14 it clearly states is was basically not possible to own a personal radio transmitter/receiver until 1956 when the Communinst Party Congress allowed it. And also is talks about a "boom" of personal radio tranceivers since 1958. However, there were restrictions of frequency use (aparent reasons - military and KGB) and these home-made radios were very often built and used by people with technical education or jobs - just like Zina and Doroshenko. Zolotaryov must have been familiar with the technology too, as he was a former soldier. Very intresting reading.

It would hint at the possibility the group intercepted sensitive communication or their communication was intercepted by the military (pilots?). But we only have references to "Kolevatov's device" and "tins and wires" to support that. Zina's reference to "Kolevatov's device" would hint at there was another one. Maybe they just tried to test some home-made equipment to communicate between themselves and the group was actually split when the bad things started. I have no way to prove that until such a device is reported to be found in the area. Even if it was, it would have been confiscated by authorities.

full text here: https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/651559.pdf

February 10, 2019, 01:58:30 PM
Reply #16
Offline

gypsy



 I think that only a jet provides the necessary motivation. For any other alternatives, there would be time to negotiate or stand and fight.


I actually find the ground attack by jets unlikely as it was not their purpose at that time. Modern aircraft of that era such as MiG-21 or SU-7 were designed as interceptors with no ground-attack capability. Also, they were too fast to allow anybody a time for reaction, as were bomber aircraft of that time. They were designed to attack from higher altitude so it is unlikely that the group heard the incoming aircraft and fled the tent and slope into the woods. The most plausible way to anticipate the air strike would be dropping of flares to mark the target. That would be a good reason to leave and would allow for reaction time. They would know that flares mean incoming air strike as at least Zolotaryov was in the army before. The military training of such type would make sense as the bombing at that time was far from accurate. There might have been no bombs dropped after all or they missed the "target" by a long margin, hence no evidence of explosion in the area.

February 10, 2019, 04:49:15 PM
Reply #17
Offline

GlennM


Is there not a badly out of focus photo that could be a descending flare? It's hard to imagine someone grabbing the camera instead of boots, but...

The thing about the Jets is you may not hear them approach but they make a huge noise once you are behind one. I don't think a low pass is consistent with dropping flares. Therefore if flares were dropped from altitude and the hikers felt a bomb run was to follow, the response would be the same, namely to bug out. I think they were in the wrong place at the right time. They ran for their lives, waited as long as they could, tried to stay warm and make a shelter, returned to camp but could not survive an uphill climb equipped as they were.

When I think about the radio, if it were me and I had a working radio, I'd send a message, then bug out.

February 11, 2019, 02:35:57 PM
Reply #18
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Hello and thanks for the post.

Any of the deceased will decompose according to the environmental conditions where they died. To me, that is a distraction and peripheral to the central issue. I think the injuries are consistent with falling. Where and when are also peripheral considerations. Secondly, it seems reasonable that once the hikers resolved to travel all the way to the edge of the forest, they would all be in need of heat. The reason for not returning to camp after departure was , I believe for a warm fire and to be certain the aerial threat was over. Who is to say if those jets were going to test bombs or bomb sights? I believe that the eventual decision to have a team try to get back to the tent was a heroism since the team leader was in that group. It might have taken 30 minutes to get down hill,but going uphill is something else altogether. I imagine the time doubled.  I also believe there was no other choice than to try to return. The idea would be for three to get back to camp, load food clothes and ski down to rapidly bring relief to those at the tree or digging a snow cave. I think the return party was as determined as anyone with a death sentence on them can be. No one stopped and none turned back. Finally, going back to original motivations, I believe the Russians hikers knew that if they got killed by an airstrike or a vibration induced snowslide, the military would suppress involvement for State security. Therefore, their best strategy was to get out of harm's way and hope for the best. It the dilemma of choosing the devil or the deep as they say. A cold night in the Cold War.

Do you seriously believe that the Dyatlov Group just wandered into a Military Range of some kind  !  ?  Do you think the USSR Authorities were idiots.  The Dyatlov Group was cleared to go on that expedition. They would not have been CLEARED to go on that expedition if there was any kind of danger that you are concocting.
DB

February 11, 2019, 02:47:12 PM
Reply #19
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Hello and thanks for the post.

Any of the deceased will decompose according to the environmental conditions where they died. To me, that is a distraction and peripheral to the central issue. I think the injuries are consistent with falling. Where and when are also peripheral considerations. Secondly, it seems reasonable that once the hikers resolved to travel all the way to the edge of the forest, they would all be in need of heat. The reason for not returning to camp after departure was , I believe for a warm fire and to be certain the aerial threat was over. Who is to say if those jets were going to test bombs or bomb sights? I believe that the eventual decision to have a team try to get back to the tent was a heroism since the team leader was in that group. It might have taken 30 minutes to get down hill,but going uphill is something else altogether. I imagine the time doubled.  I also believe there was no other choice than to try to return. The idea would be for three to get back to camp, load food clothes and ski down to rapidly bring relief to those at the tree or digging a snow cave. I think the return party was as determined as anyone with a death sentence on them can be. No one stopped and none turned back. Finally, going back to original motivations, I believe the Russians hikers knew that if they got killed by an airstrike or a vibration induced snowslide, the military would suppress involvement for State security. Therefore, their best strategy was to get out of harm's way and hope for the best. It the dilemma of choosing the devil or the deep as they say. A cold night in the Cold War.

Do you seriously believe that the Dyatlov Group just wandered into a Military Range of some kind  !  ?  Do you think the USSR Authorities were idiots.  The Dyatlov Group was cleared to go on that expedition. They would not have been CLEARED to go on that expedition if there was any kind of danger that you are concocting.

But do you think that the authorities in charge of approving the Dyatlov group route also had access to all the military secrets for developing and testing weapons? 

February 11, 2019, 04:19:08 PM
Reply #20
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Hello and thanks for the post.

Any of the deceased will decompose according to the environmental conditions where they died. To me, that is a distraction and peripheral to the central issue. I think the injuries are consistent with falling. Where and when are also peripheral considerations. Secondly, it seems reasonable that once the hikers resolved to travel all the way to the edge of the forest, they would all be in need of heat. The reason for not returning to camp after departure was , I believe for a warm fire and to be certain the aerial threat was over. Who is to say if those jets were going to test bombs or bomb sights? I believe that the eventual decision to have a team try to get back to the tent was a heroism since the team leader was in that group. It might have taken 30 minutes to get down hill,but going uphill is something else altogether. I imagine the time doubled.  I also believe there was no other choice than to try to return. The idea would be for three to get back to camp, load food clothes and ski down to rapidly bring relief to those at the tree or digging a snow cave. I think the return party was as determined as anyone with a death sentence on them can be. No one stopped and none turned back. Finally, going back to original motivations, I believe the Russians hikers knew that if they got killed by an airstrike or a vibration induced snowslide, the military would suppress involvement for State security. Therefore, their best strategy was to get out of harm's way and hope for the best. It the dilemma of choosing the devil or the deep as they say. A cold night in the Cold War.

Do you seriously believe that the Dyatlov Group just wandered into a Military Range of some kind  !  ?  Do you think the USSR Authorities were idiots.  The Dyatlov Group was cleared to go on that expedition. They would not have been CLEARED to go on that expedition if there was any kind of danger that you are concocting.

But do you think that the authorities in charge of approving the Dyatlov group route also had access to all the military secrets for developing and testing weapons?

The USSR was not the top secret out of bounds prison camp that many people in the West are led to believe.
DB

February 11, 2019, 04:44:33 PM
Reply #21
Offline

GlennM


Hello,

I don't believe the hikers were permitted to go to a bombing range. I do believe that if the Soviet armed forces wished to train flyers in a barren low mountainous area they would do it. I believe that the shock produced by a flight of low Jets and the uncertainty of their intention would be motivation enough for the hikers to seek relative safety in the trees. They can not wave the Jets off, only vacate the area. Given the distance from camp to trees,  the threat of destruction was real. Too, if human error got the hikers off track and put them on the side of a barren hill for the night, could a small navigational error out a Soviet MIG on the wrong side of a mountain top?  This tragedy would not have happened if the hikers camped in the trees. Trees were safety.  Please keep the discussion going. I value your thoughts.

February 11, 2019, 05:16:20 PM
Reply #22
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Hello,

I don't believe the hikers were permitted to go to a bombing range. I do believe that if the Soviet armed forces wished to train flyers in a barren low mountainous area they would do it. I believe that the shock produced by a flight of low Jets and the uncertainty of their intention would be motivation enough for the hikers to seek relative safety in the trees. They can not wave the Jets off, only vacate the area. Given the distance from camp to trees,  the threat of destruction was real. Too, if human error got the hikers off track and put them on the side of a barren hill for the night, could a small navigational error out a Soviet MIG on the wrong side of a mountain top?  This tragedy would not have happened if the hikers camped in the trees. Trees were safety.  Please keep the discussion going. I value your thoughts.

Good enough point. I remember when I used to go fishing in England near the Welsh Borders and often would be surprised at the appearance and sound of a LOW FLYING FIGHTER JET of the RAF.  Sometimes we would stop fishing and watch the aerial antics. Never once was I concerned though. I think it would have had to have been something other than a low flying plane to cause the Dyatlov Group to abandon their safety refuge.
DB

February 11, 2019, 11:36:33 PM
Reply #23
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Hello,

I don't believe the hikers were permitted to go to a bombing range. I do believe that if the Soviet armed forces wished to train flyers in a barren low mountainous area they would do it. I believe that the shock produced by a flight of low Jets and the uncertainty of their intention would be motivation enough for the hikers to seek relative safety in the trees. They can not wave the Jets off, only vacate the area. Given the distance from camp to trees,  the threat of destruction was real. Too, if human error got the hikers off track and put them on the side of a barren hill for the night, could a small navigational error out a Soviet MIG on the wrong side of a mountain top?  This tragedy would not have happened if the hikers camped in the trees. Trees were safety.  Please keep the discussion going. I value your thoughts.

Good enough point. I remember when I used to go fishing in England near the Welsh Borders and often would be surprised at the appearance and sound of a LOW FLYING FIGHTER JET of the RAF.  Sometimes we would stop fishing and watch the aerial antics. Never once was I concerned though. I think it would have had to have been something other than a low flying plane to cause the Dyatlov Group to abandon their safety refuge.

Agreed. I have often been buzzed by very low flying aircraft and although it can startle you it doesn’t lead to panic.  Unless of course they had already started to drop ordinance.

February 12, 2019, 08:39:01 AM
Reply #24
Offline

GlennM


Hi and thanks for the criticsl thought. I too have been buzzed by a jet and it did not completly unhinge me either. However, I wasn't on a snowy hillside, and the jet passed once and was gone.  If the photo of the glowing orb was a flare, this might suggest an intention to return for practice putposes. Vietnam was heating up and Russia supplied the North with aircraft.

The hikers left quickly because they could not talk their way out of an iminant threat of destruction. What else would make a group of sane college educated experienced trekkers say as a group, "We have to go...now!"? Bombardment, snowslide, uncertainty of others intentions is compelling to me. Looked at from another perspective. why would it be foolish to remain in camp and wait it out? Answer, we can't be seen and maybe we are in the wrong place.

February 12, 2019, 08:47:09 AM
Reply #25
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Hi and thanks for the criticsl thought. I too have been buzzed by a jet and it did not completly unhinge me either. However, I wasn't on a snowy hillside, and the jet passed once and was gone.  If the photo of the glowing orb was a flare, this might suggest an intention to return for practice putposes. Vietnam was heating up and Russia supplied the North with aircraft.

The hikers left quickly because they could not talk their way out of an iminant threat of destruction. What else would make a group of sane college educated experienced trekkers say as a group, "We have to go...now!"? Bombardment, snowslide, uncertainty of others intentions is compelling to me. Looked at from another perspective. why would it be foolish to remain in camp and wait it out? Answer, we can't be seen and maybe we are in the wrong place.

There seems to be lots of possible reasons. E.g
Forced out
Infrasound
Bomb
Poisonous gas
Etc

The more you look at the details the more you uncover

February 12, 2019, 11:19:35 AM
Reply #26
Offline

gypsy


Hi and thanks for the criticsl thought. I too have been buzzed by a jet and it did not completly unhinge me either. However, I wasn't on a snowy hillside, and the jet passed once and was gone.  If the photo of the glowing orb was a flare, this might suggest an intention to return for practice putposes. Vietnam was heating up and Russia supplied the North with aircraft.

The hikers left quickly because they could not talk their way out of an iminant threat of destruction. What else would make a group of sane college educated experienced trekkers say as a group, "We have to go...now!"? Bombardment, snowslide, uncertainty of others intentions is compelling to me. Looked at from another perspective. why would it be foolish to remain in camp and wait it out? Answer, we can't be seen and maybe we are in the wrong place.

There seems to be lots of possible reasons. E.g
Forced out
Infrasound
Bomb
Poisonous gas
Etc

The more you look at the details the more you uncover

As for the flares (which were commonly used to mark air strike targets or landing sites for paratroopers during WWII), it depends on the specific setup and people. That means I would not be scared as I have always lived near the airport I never experienced war as such. On the other hand, it is fully understandable if a dropped flare causes panic to people with experience in war zone (just like Semyon) or anybody familiar with bomb testing procedure (Kolevatov). War trauma can trigger much worse and violent reactions when "experienced" again, let alone the attempt to flee and find shelter wherever possible.

As for the time frame, 1959 is exactly in the middle of a process of introduction of MiG21 aircraft and Vympel R13 Air to Air self navigated missile (copycat of US-made Sidewinder, indroduced in 1956, Soviet version in 1961). The flares are ofter used as a countermeasure and would be used during a training (probably with disarmed missiles) because they lure away the infrared sensors of a missile from a target aircraft. Could hva ebeen dropped somewhere by accident.

I would label this theory "plausible". Above mentioned definitely happened somewhere in the USSR in 1959 and around that time. We cannout prove it happened at EXCACT time or place without supporting documentation.

Forced out - plausible, by whom? (no outside party - Semyon or Thibaux are my favourite suspects because of the clothes and shoes they were wearing unlike the rest of the group, outside party - miltary/paratroopers?) motive?

Infrasound - seems inconsistent with the evidence and unlikely to trigger the death of 9 people...but might be interesting to study further

Bomb - no traces of that in the area, bomb threat (real or not) still plausible, with or without flares, but Ivanov mentioned lights in the sky and burned tree tops that would support use of flares, maybe and aerial explosion? night bombing training?

Poisonous gas - plausible, source unknown - chemical weapons or natural source? would be interesting what kind of substances could have been used in 1959 and how would they affect the victims

February 12, 2019, 12:08:29 PM
Reply #27
Offline

Star man

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Hi and thanks for the criticsl thought. I too have been buzzed by a jet and it did not completly unhinge me either. However, I wasn't on a snowy hillside, and the jet passed once and was gone.  If the photo of the glowing orb was a flare, this might suggest an intention to return for practice putposes. Vietnam was heating up and Russia supplied the North with aircraft.

The hikers left quickly because they could not talk their way out of an iminant threat of destruction. What else would make a group of sane college educated experienced trekkers say as a group, "We have to go...now!"? Bombardment, snowslide, uncertainty of others intentions is compelling to me. Looked at from another perspective. why would it be foolish to remain in camp and wait it out? Answer, we can't be seen and maybe we are in the wrong place.

There seems to be lots of possible reasons. E.g
Forced out
Infrasound
Bomb
Poisonous gas
Etc

The more you look at the details the more you uncover

As for the flares (which were commonly used to mark air strike targets or landing sites for paratroopers during WWII), it depends on the specific setup and people. That means I would not be scared as I have always lived near the airport I never experienced war as such. On the other hand, it is fully understandable if a dropped flare causes panic to people with experience in war zone (just like Semyon) or anybody familiar with bomb testing procedure (Kolevatov). War trauma can trigger much worse and violent reactions when "experienced" again, let alone the attempt to flee and find shelter wherever possible.

As for the time frame, 1959 is exactly in the middle of a process of introduction of MiG21 aircraft and Vympel R13 Air to Air self navigated missile (copycat of US-made Sidewinder, indroduced in 1956, Soviet version in 1961). The flares are ofter used as a countermeasure and would be used during a training (probably with disarmed missiles) because they lure away the infrared sensors of a missile from a target aircraft. Could hva ebeen dropped somewhere by accident.

I would label this theory "plausible". Above mentioned definitely happened somewhere in the USSR in 1959 and around that time. We cannout prove it happened at EXCACT time or place without supporting documentation.

Forced out - plausible, by whom? (no outside party - Semyon or Thibaux are my favourite suspects because of the clothes and shoes they were wearing unlike the rest of the group, outside party - miltary/paratroopers?) motive?

Infrasound - seems inconsistent with the evidence and unlikely to trigger the death of 9 people...but might be interesting to study further

Bomb - no traces of that in the area, bomb threat (real or not) still plausible, with or without flares, but Ivanov mentioned lights in the sky and burned tree tops that would support use of flares, maybe and aerial explosion? night bombing training?

Poisonous gas - plausible, source unknown - chemical weapons or natural source? would be interesting what kind of substances could have been used in 1959 and how would they affect the victims

One of the key things to consider in the DPI is that of the 5 people who supposedly died of hypothermia, only Dyatlov autopsy report is consistent with this hypothermia.  Also look at case files and the clothing.

Semyon & Thibo in fighting of some kind.  It's possible, I have considered this but so struggle to construct a credible hypothesis

Infrasound - it would only take one or two influential group members to panic to cause the rest to take flight too if they believed there was a threat.  Again I have struggled so far to make a credible hypothesis.

Bomb - yes I have been able to construct a credible hypothesis for a low yield nuclear weapon test.  See military section of forum.

Poisonous gas - yes.  Seems to be a good fit.  Also see low yield nuke.  Also there are several other ideas on NO2 poisoning.

Regards

Star man

February 12, 2019, 01:25:52 PM
Reply #28
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Hello,

I don't believe the hikers were permitted to go to a bombing range. I do believe that if the Soviet armed forces wished to train flyers in a barren low mountainous area they would do it. I believe that the shock produced by a flight of low Jets and the uncertainty of their intention would be motivation enough for the hikers to seek relative safety in the trees. They can not wave the Jets off, only vacate the area. Given the distance from camp to trees,  the threat of destruction was real. Too, if human error got the hikers off track and put them on the side of a barren hill for the night, could a small navigational error out a Soviet MIG on the wrong side of a mountain top?  This tragedy would not have happened if the hikers camped in the trees. Trees were safety.  Please keep the discussion going. I value your thoughts.

Good enough point. I remember when I used to go fishing in England near the Welsh Borders and often would be surprised at the appearance and sound of a LOW FLYING FIGHTER JET of the RAF.  Sometimes we would stop fishing and watch the aerial antics. Never once was I concerned though. I think it would have had to have been something other than a low flying plane to cause the Dyatlov Group to abandon their safety refuge.

Agreed. I have often been buzzed by very low flying aircraft and although it can startle you it doesn’t lead to panic.  Unless of course they had already started to drop ordinance.


No evidence of ordinance being dropped was found by the search parties.
DB

February 12, 2019, 01:31:02 PM
Reply #29
Offline

sarapuk

Case-Files Achievement Recipient
Hi and thanks for the criticsl thought. I too have been buzzed by a jet and it did not completly unhinge me either. However, I wasn't on a snowy hillside, and the jet passed once and was gone.  If the photo of the glowing orb was a flare, this might suggest an intention to return for practice putposes. Vietnam was heating up and Russia supplied the North with aircraft.

The hikers left quickly because they could not talk their way out of an iminant threat of destruction. What else would make a group of sane college educated experienced trekkers say as a group, "We have to go...now!"? Bombardment, snowslide, uncertainty of others intentions is compelling to me. Looked at from another perspective. why would it be foolish to remain in camp and wait it out? Answer, we can't be seen and maybe we are in the wrong place.

So you are suggesting that the USSR used the area for practice bombing runs  !  ?  And do you not think that the Educational Establishment that assisted the Dyatlov Group would not be aware of such MILITARY TESTING AREAS  !  ? 
DB