The discarded flashlight

[Nigel Evans]

Does anyone know the case files well enough to answer this question? :-"Was the discarded flashlight (the one found some way down the slope) tested to determine if it worked correctly with it's batteries replaced and were the batteries as found tested to determine if they still had charge?"
I've only seen reference to it being found switched on. It's possible of course that it just failed and was discarded.

[Star man]

Does anyone know the case files well enough to answer this question? :-"Was the discarded flashlight (the one found some way down the slope) tested to determine if it worked correctly with it's batteries replaced and were the batteries as found tested to determine if they still had charge?"
I've only seen reference to it being found switched on. It's possible of course that it just failed and was discarded.

8f I remember. I think there is a discrepancy.  Somewhere it says that the flashlight 450m from the tent was found switched off and was working when the searchers found it.  Cant remember where I read it, but I think it was your good sel who pointed me toward the comment.  Kind of leaves us with some confusion.  Its potentially an important point though.

Regards

Star man

[PJ]

Star men, the flashlight 450m below the tent was ON and with dead battery.
https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-136-198?lid=1&flp=1#191

The other one that was found beside the tent was OFF and in working order when turned ON
https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-298-300?lid=1

And looks like there was few more flashlights inside the tent.
https://dyatlovpass.com/grigoriev-2 (Scan 36)

[Nigel Evans]

Got this - "No results yielded, except that 100 m below the tent an electric flashlight was found switched on and out of battery belonging to someone from the dead group." - https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-209-220?rbid=17743
But no mention of testing to confirm it's status.

[Star man]

Star men, the flashlight 450m below the tent was ON and with dead battery.
https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-136-198?lid=1&flp=1#191

The other one that was found beside the tent was OFF and in working order when turned ON
https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-298-300?lid=1

And looks like there was few more flashlights inside the tent.
https://dyatlovpass.com/grigoriev-2 (Scan 36)

Yes, that is my understanding too.  But I thought I had seen something that contradicted this.  I will have a dig if I get some time.

Regards

Srar man

[sarapuk]

Does anyone know the case files well enough to answer this question? :-"Was the discarded flashlight (the one found some way down the slope) tested to determine if it worked correctly with it's batteries replaced and were the batteries as found tested to determine if they still had charge?"
I've only seen reference to it being found switched on. It's possible of course that it just failed and was discarded.

By all accounts all the flashlights worked.

[Nigel Evans]

Does anyone know the case files well enough to answer this question? :-"Was the discarded flashlight (the one found some way down the slope) tested to determine if it worked correctly with it's batteries replaced and were the batteries as found tested to determine if they still had charge?"
I've only seen reference to it being found switched on. It's possible of course that it just failed and was discarded.

By all accounts all the flashlights worked.

The point of this conversation is to detail those accounts?
The only way to confirm that this flashlight was left illuminating the snow is by testing it with new batteries. If it stopped working (perhaps by being dropped and the bulb filament snapped) then it would be sensible to retain it as the batteries would be useful in another flashlight (E.g. Nicolai had a flashlight in his jacket and others were left at the tent).

So this would seem to favour that either it was left there (1) as a beacon or (2) it was dropped, stopped working and they failed to pick it up even though the batteries would have been useful.
(1) suggests orderly behaviour.(2) suggests panic.
My money is on (2).

[sarapuk]

Does anyone know the case files well enough to answer this question? :-"Was the discarded flashlight (the one found some way down the slope) tested to determine if it worked correctly with it's batteries replaced and were the batteries as found tested to determine if they still had charge?"
I've only seen reference to it being found switched on. It's possible of course that it just failed and was discarded.

By all accounts all the flashlights worked.

The point of this conversation is to detail those accounts?
The only way to confirm that this flashlight was left illuminating the snow is by testing it with new batteries. If it stopped working (perhaps by being dropped and the bulb filament snapped) then it would be sensible to retain it as the batteries would be useful in another flashlight (E.g. Nicolai had a flashlight in his jacket and others were left at the tent).

So this would seem to favour that either it was left there (1) as a beacon or (2) it was dropped, stopped working and they failed to pick it up even though the batteries would have been useful.
(1) suggests orderly behaviour.(2) suggests panic.
My money is on (2).

Detail  ! ?  Thats something lacking or should I say missing from much of the original investigation.  So once again its any ones guess.

[Star man]

Does anyone know the case files well enough to answer this question? :-"Was the discarded flashlight (the one found some way down the slope) tested to determine if it worked correctly with it's batteries replaced and were the batteries as found tested to determine if they still had charge?"
I've only seen reference to it being found switched on. It's possible of course that it just failed and was discarded.

By all accounts all the flashlights worked.

The point of this conversation is to detail those accounts?
The only way to confirm that this flashlight was left illuminating the snow is by testing it with new batteries. If it stopped working (perhaps by being dropped and the bulb filament snapped) then it would be sensible to retain it as the batteries would be useful in another flashlight (E.g. Nicolai had a flashlight in his jacket and others were left at the tent).

So this would seem to favour that either it was left there (1) as a beacon or (2) it was dropped, stopped working and they failed to pick it up even though the batteries would have been useful.
(1) suggests orderly behaviour.(2) suggests panic.
My money is on (2).

I would go with 2.  Why create a beacon 450m from the tent.  Could understand one at the tent, unless they couldn't see the one at the tent without leaving a second beacon.  I still think 2 though.  Given the treacherous conditions you would not leave your last flashlight when you could use it to improve safe travel.

Regards

Star man

[Ting]

A working battery is also useful for starting a fire as long as you have a pen as well. (They may not have known that)
The flashlight was 'discarded' around the 3rd rocky ridge down - could be that the holder tripped on the rocks dropping it, not necessarily in panic. 
I agree that a beacon although possible is less plausible - If I want to return to the tent I have tracks to follow uphill which I can spot with my flashlight.
There is another reason for leaving a flashlight behind. If you are being followed in the dark but at a distance when your pursuers arrive at the flashlight and pick it up this will signal their distance to you. Personally, I do not think this likely but it is a possibility.

[Star man]

A working battery is also useful for starting a fire as long as you have a pen as well. (They may not have known that)
The flashlight was 'discarded' around the 3rd rocky ridge down - could be that the holder tripped on the rocks dropping it, not necessarily in panic. 
I agree that a beacon although possible is less plausible - If I want to return to the tent I have tracks to follow uphill which I can spot with my flashlight.
There is another reason for leaving a flashlight behind. If you are being followed in the dark but at a distance when your pursuers arrive at the flashlight and pick it up this will signal their distance to you. Personally, I do not think this likely but it is a possibility.

It is possible someone fell as per WAB's theory but why wouldn't one of the other hikers pick the flashlight up again.  Especially if it was still on, it would be easy to find?

Regards

Star man

[Ting]

A working battery is also useful for starting a fire as long as you have a pen as well. (They may not have known that)
The flashlight was 'discarded' around the 3rd rocky ridge down - could be that the holder tripped on the rocks dropping it, not necessarily in panic. 
I agree that a beacon although possible is less plausible - If I want to return to the tent I have tracks to follow uphill which I can spot with my flashlight.
There is another reason for leaving a flashlight behind. If you are being followed in the dark but at a distance when your pursuers arrive at the flashlight and pick it up this will signal their distance to you. Personally, I do not think this likely but it is a possibility.

It is possible someone fell as per WAB's theory but why wouldn't one of the other hikers pick the flashlight up again.  Especially if it was still on, it would be easy to find?

Regards

Star man

Yes you're right if it was still on it would be easy to find which suggests some possibilities:-
1) It may have malfunctioned when hitting the ground and was not immediately able to be found. - I've dropped flashlights in the past and it's gone out only to come back on when picked up.
2) It may have landed face down in the snow with no light showing and was not immediately able to be found.
3) It may be that the person who found the flashlight inadvertently switched it on and off and mistook off for on - I think this explanation unlikely.
4) If left ON the battery would have surely drained. Sometimes batteries come back to life. Let's take the simplest zinc/carbon battery as an example. If you take a zinc rod and a carbon rod, connect them together with a wire, and then immerse the two rods in liquid sulfuric acid, you create a battery. Electrons will flow through the wire from the zinc rod to the carbon rod. Hydrogen gas builds up on the carbon rod, and over a fairly short period of time coats the majority of the carbon rod's surface. The layer of hydrogen gas coating the rod blocks the reaction occurring in the cell and the battery begins to look "dead". If you let the battery rest for awhile, the hydrogen gas dissipates and the battery "comes back to life". If the hydrogen sits on the rod and there is no power drain any remaining charge in the battery can remain for a considerable time. It may be that the finder by picking up the flashlight and jiggling it dislodged the hydrogen allowing the flashlight to come back to life.

If the flashlight was being used prior to being discarded I assume it was being held by someone at or near the front of the group to light the way. I wonder who was leading the way ?

[Squatch]

A working battery is also useful for starting a fire as long as you have a pen as well. (They may not have known that)
The flashlight was 'discarded' around the 3rd rocky ridge down - could be that the holder tripped on the rocks dropping it, not necessarily in panic. 
I agree that a beacon although possible is less plausible - If I want to return to the tent I have tracks to follow uphill which I can spot with my flashlight.
There is another reason for leaving a flashlight behind. If you are being followed in the dark but at a distance when your pursuers arrive at the flashlight and pick it up this will signal their distance to you. Personally, I do not think this likely but it is a possibility.

It is possible someone fell as per WAB's theory but why wouldn't one of the other hikers pick the flashlight up again.  Especially if it was still on, it would be easy to find?

Regards

Star man

Yes you're right if it was still on it would be easy to find...

If the flashlight was being used prior to being discarded I assume it was being held by someone at or near the front of the group to light the way. I wonder who was leading the way ?

If Rustem Slobodin was leading/carrying the flashlight and fell, a fractured skull injury might have occupied the group's attention to the point where the flashlight was not recovered. Slobodin did have such an injury. And wasn't Igor Dyatlov's flashlight found on or near the tent? Does that imply that the flashlight further down the slope was not his?

Also, if the weather conditions were so bad they ultimately caused a panic in the group, then those conditions may have made it difficult to recover a dropped flashlight or even to simply hold onto one.

It is speculated that Semyon Zolotaryov and Nikolay Thibeaux-Brignolle were outside the tent when the disaster started, as they were dressed the warmest and had some kind of boots or shoes on their feet. They may have been inspecting or fixing the tent due to wind damage. If so, one of them could have a flashlight. Dyatlov's flashlight could have been used in combination with the horizontal slits in the upper part of the tent to see and communicate with Zolotaryov and Thibeaux-Brignolle who were outside. It would make sense in my mind to have the two who were dressed the best lead the way and hold a flashlight.

[Ting]

I'm not sure how bad the weather was to make recovering the flashlight possible but I noticed that the fire at the Cedar tree lacked a snow wall to protect it against wind - it takes little time and effort to build a small snow wall so I'm assuming there was not a strong wind by the Cedar which begs the question how strong could the wind have been toward the bottom part of the slope ? After all the tree was only a short distance into the treeline.

[sarapuk]

Its highly likely that all the flashlights were working. And easy to accidenttaly drop one during the flight from the Tent.

[Nigel Evans]

I'm thinking that they were hit by lightning. A lightning strike can throw people 30 feet landing on their heads

[Star man]

A working battery is also useful for starting a fire as long as you have a pen as well. (They may not have known that)
The flashlight was 'discarded' around the 3rd rocky ridge down - could be that the holder tripped on the rocks dropping it, not necessarily in panic. 
I agree that a beacon although possible is less plausible - If I want to return to the tent I have tracks to follow uphill which I can spot with my flashlight.
There is another reason for leaving a flashlight behind. If you are being followed in the dark but at a distance when your pursuers arrive at the flashlight and pick it up this will signal their distance to you. Personally, I do not think this likely but it is a possibility.

It is possible someone fell as per WAB's theory but why wouldn't one of the other hikers pick the flashlight up again.  Especially if it was still on, it would be easy to find?

Regards

Star man

Yes you're right if it was still on it would be easy to find which suggests some possibilities:-
1) It may have malfunctioned when hitting the ground and was not immediately able to be found. - I've dropped flashlights in the past and it's gone out only to come back on when picked up.
2) It may have landed face down in the snow with no light showing and was not immediately able to be found.
3) It may be that the person who found the flashlight inadvertently switched it on and off and mistook off for on - I think this explanation unlikely.
4) If left ON the battery would have surely drained. Sometimes batteries come back to life. Let's take the simplest zinc/carbon battery as an example. If you take a zinc rod and a carbon rod, connect them together with a wire, and then immerse the two rods in liquid sulfuric acid, you create a battery. Electrons will flow through the wire from the zinc rod to the carbon rod. Hydrogen gas builds up on the carbon rod, and over a fairly short period of time coats the majority of the carbon rod's surface. The layer of hydrogen gas coating the rod blocks the reaction occurring in the cell and the battery begins to look "dead". If you let the battery rest for awhile, the hydrogen gas dissipates and the battery "comes back to life". If the hydrogen sits on the rod and there is no power drain any remaining charge in the battery can remain for a considerable time. It may be that the finder by picking up the flashlight and jiggling it dislodged the hydrogen allowing the flashlight to come back to life.

If the flashlight was being used prior to being discarded I assume it was being held by someone at or near the front of the group to light the way. I wonder who was leading the way ?

Some good points.

Regards

Star man

[Star man]

I'm thinking that they were hit by lightning. A lightning strike can throw people 30 feet landing on their heads

Possible.  They would be having some pretty bad luck at thus point.

Regards

Star man

[Squatch]

I'm not sure how bad the weather was to make recovering the flashlight possible but I noticed that the fire at the Cedar tree lacked a snow wall to protect it against wind - it takes little time and effort to build a small snow wall so I'm assuming there was not a strong wind by the Cedar which begs the question how strong could the wind have been toward the bottom part of the slope ? After all the tree was only a short distance into the treeline.

Other people on this forum will probably have a better answer than me, but I think the rescuers reported that the winds are bad on the mountain slope but not as bad in the bottom of the slope where the Cedar tree is.

But if that is the case, and there was trouble in the ravine/den area where four of the hikers died, then what caused their deaths? It is almost like some weather event reached from the top of the mountain slope down to the Cedar tree. Or it was not a weather event at all. This event is very hard to understand.

[Squatch]

I'm thinking that they were hit by lightning. A lightning strike can throw people 30 feet landing on their heads

Possible.  They would be having some pretty bad luck at thus point.

Regards

Star man

Agreed. It looks like whatever happened to them involved bad luck. Ordinary normal life does not explain this.

[Star man]

A working battery is also useful for starting a fire as long as you have a pen as well. (They may not have known that)
The flashlight was 'discarded' around the 3rd rocky ridge down - could be that the holder tripped on the rocks dropping it, not necessarily in panic. 
I agree that a beacon although possible is less plausible - If I want to return to the tent I have tracks to follow uphill which I can spot with my flashlight.
There is another reason for leaving a flashlight behind. If you are being followed in the dark but at a distance when your pursuers arrive at the flashlight and pick it up this will signal their distance to you. Personally, I do not think this likely but it is a possibility.

It is possible someone fell as per WAB's theory but why wouldn't one of the other hikers pick the flashlight up again.  Especially if it was still on, it would be easy to find?

Regards

Star man

Yes you're right if it was still on it would be easy to find...

If the flashlight was being used prior to being discarded I assume it was being held by someone at or near the front of the group to light the way. I wonder who was leading the way ?

If Rustem Slobodin was leading/carrying the flashlight and fell, a fractured skull injury might have occupied the group's attention to the point where the flashlight was not recovered. Slobodin did have such an injury. And wasn't Igor Dyatlov's flashlight found on or near the tent? Does that imply that the flashlight further down the slope was not his?

Also, if the weather conditions were so bad they ultimately caused a panic in the group, then those conditions may have made it difficult to recover a dropped flashlight or even to simply hold onto one.

It is speculated that Semyon Zolotaryov and Nikolay Thibeaux-Brignolle were outside the tent when the disaster started, as they were dressed the warmest and had some kind of boots or shoes on their feet. They may have been inspecting or fixing the tent due to wind damage. If so, one of them could have a flashlight. Dyatlov's flashlight could have been used in combination with the horizontal slits in the upper part of the tent to see and communicate with Zolotaryov and Thibeaux-Brignolle who were outside. It would make sense in my mind to have the two who were dressed the best lead the way and hold a flashlight.

Could Semyon and Thibo have been outside acting as centuries/guards, watching for something?  Maybe they would have had their outer gear on if they were though?

Regards

Star man

[Star man]

I'm thinking that they were hit by lightning. A lightning strike can throw people 30 feet landing on their heads

Possible.  They would be having some pretty bad luck at thus point.

Regards

Star man

Agreed. It looks like whatever happened to them involved bad luck. Ordinary normal life does not explain this.

That is a good observation I think.  Whatever happened to them was unusual.

Regards

Star man

[Squatch]

A working battery is also useful for starting a fire as long as you have a pen as well. (They may not have known that)
The flashlight was 'discarded' around the 3rd rocky ridge down - could be that the holder tripped on the rocks dropping it, not necessarily in panic. 
I agree that a beacon although possible is less plausible - If I want to return to the tent I have tracks to follow uphill which I can spot with my flashlight.
There is another reason for leaving a flashlight behind. If you are being followed in the dark but at a distance when your pursuers arrive at the flashlight and pick it up this will signal their distance to you. Personally, I do not think this likely but it is a possibility.

It is possible someone fell as per WAB's theory but why wouldn't one of the other hikers pick the flashlight up again.  Especially if it was still on, it would be easy to find?

Regards

Star man

Yes you're right if it was still on it would be easy to find...

If the flashlight was being used prior to being discarded I assume it was being held by someone at or near the front of the group to light the way. I wonder who was leading the way ?

If Rustem Slobodin was leading/carrying the flashlight and fell, a fractured skull injury might have occupied the group's attention to the point where the flashlight was not recovered. Slobodin did have such an injury. And wasn't Igor Dyatlov's flashlight found on or near the tent? Does that imply that the flashlight further down the slope was not his?

Also, if the weather conditions were so bad they ultimately caused a panic in the group, then those conditions may have made it difficult to recover a dropped flashlight or even to simply hold onto one.

It is speculated that Semyon Zolotaryov and Nikolay Thibeaux-Brignolle were outside the tent when the disaster started, as they were dressed the warmest and had some kind of boots or shoes on their feet. They may have been inspecting or fixing the tent due to wind damage. If so, one of them could have a flashlight. Dyatlov's flashlight could have been used in combination with the horizontal slits in the upper part of the tent to see and communicate with Zolotaryov and Thibeaux-Brignolle who were outside. It would make sense in my mind to have the two who were dressed the best lead the way and hold a flashlight.

Could Semyon and Thibo have been outside acting as centuries/guards, watching for something?  Maybe they would have had their outer gear on if they were though?

Regards

Star man

To solve this mystery, my mind likes to link as many clues together in a way that tells a story. The more facts explained the more likely the truth, in my opinion.

Semyon and Thibo outside is suspected due to their better clothing. And if they were outside the tent and Igor Dyatlov is inside the tent, communications through horizontal slits at eye level in the tent would let Dyatlov shine his flashlight through to see Semyon and Thibo. And to talk to them. Dyatlov later loses his flashlight during whatever caused the panic and tent evacuation. It is found in the off position because he only used it during communication.

I think the snow on the tent with Igor's flashlight on top means:

1) Igor left it there on purpose, in the off position or
2) Igor dropped it in a panic in the off position

I am assuming things, of course... I do not claim to know the truth. I'm just trying to link the evidence together into a logical story.

[Nigel Evans]

The horizontal slits at eye level may just be tears from flapping and dragging the tent to the helicopter. The forensic lab made no comment of them so very unlikely to be cuts made that night.

[Squatch]

The horizontal slits at eye level may just be tears from flapping and dragging the tent to the helicopter. The forensic lab made no comment of them so very unlikely to be cuts made that night.

Thanks. I did not know that. But didn't the lab also not document one side of the tent regarding the cuts? The forensics seem questionable, at least in hindsight. I can believe the tearing, however. It was not an easy environment to work in.

[Nigel Evans]

The horizontal slits at eye level may just be tears from flapping and dragging the tent to the helicopter. The forensic lab made no comment of them so very unlikely to be cuts made that night.

Thanks. I did not know that. But didn't the lab also not document one side of the tent regarding the cuts? The forensics seem questionable, at least in hindsight. I can believe the tearing, however. It was not an easy environment to work in.

The tears are easy to distinguish from cuts as tears can only follow along the weave/weft, (horizontally or vertically) not across. So for the forensic scientists it should have been trivial to establish cuts vs tears. Then under magnification they could determine whether the cuts were inside or outside by identifying the scoring at the start and end. I think it's reasonable to expect that they did a competent job in this regard.

What's more interesting imo is how the tent became to be in such a poor state. It beggars belief that they would dare to trust their lives to it on the ridge in those winds if it was falling apart like that. So this seems to favour that an old tent became a very old tent in just three/four weeks, and as to the cause of this (possible) accelerated wear we could consider chemicals or electrical activity. Mechanical wear due to wind (flapping) would seem to be ruled out by the cover of firn snow and the flashlight on top on 10cm of snow.

[sarapuk]

The horizontal slits at eye level may just be tears from flapping and dragging the tent to the helicopter. The forensic lab made no comment of them so very unlikely to be cuts made that night.

Thanks. I did not know that. But didn't the lab also not document one side of the tent regarding the cuts? The forensics seem questionable, at least in hindsight. I can believe the tearing, however. It was not an easy environment to work in.

The tears are easy to distinguish from cuts as tears can only follow along the weave/weft, (horizontally or vertically) not across. So for the forensic scientists it should have been trivial to establish cuts vs tears. Then under magnification they could determine whether the cuts were inside or outside by identifying the scoring at the start and end. I think it's reasonable to expect that they did a competent job in this regard.

What's more interesting imo is how the tent became to be in such a poor state. It beggars belief that they would dare to trust their lives to it on the ridge in those winds if it was falling apart like that. So this seems to favour that an old tent became a very old tent in just three/four weeks, and as to the cause of this (possible) accelerated wear we could consider chemicals or electrical activity. Mechanical wear due to wind (flapping) would seem to be ruled out by the cover of firn snow and the flashlight on top on 10cm of snow.

Well spotted Nigel. First time I have heard it suggested that the Tent was not in ideal condition for a night in a very exposed position.  In which case they may have been very scared of something down in the Forest. Yet it was to the Forest that they went after leaving the Tent. Doesnt this mystery go round in circles sometimes.

[sparrow]

I was wondering why they had to mend holes/tears every evening when they stopped if they had just sewed them up the night before.  What are they doing to it?

[Nigel Evans]

The horizontal slits at eye level may just be tears from flapping and dragging the tent to the helicopter. The forensic lab made no comment of them so very unlikely to be cuts made that night.

Thanks. I did not know that. But didn't the lab also not document one side of the tent regarding the cuts? The forensics seem questionable, at least in hindsight. I can believe the tearing, however. It was not an easy environment to work in.

The tears are easy to distinguish from cuts as tears can only follow along the weave/weft, (horizontally or vertically) not across. So for the forensic scientists it should have been trivial to establish cuts vs tears. Then under magnification they could determine whether the cuts were inside or outside by identifying the scoring at the start and end. I think it's reasonable to expect that they did a competent job in this regard.

What's more interesting imo is how the tent became to be in such a poor state. It beggars belief that they would dare to trust their lives to it on the ridge in those winds if it was falling apart like that. So this seems to favour that an old tent became a very old tent in just three/four weeks, and as to the cause of this (possible) accelerated wear we could consider chemicals or electrical activity. Mechanical wear due to wind (flapping) would seem to be ruled out by the cover of firn snow and the flashlight on top on 10cm of snow.

Well spotted Nigel. First time I have heard it suggested that the Tent was not in ideal condition for a night in a very exposed position.  In which case they may have been very scared of something down in the Forest. Yet it was to the Forest that they went after leaving the Tent. Doesnt this mystery go round in circles sometimes.

I don't think the condition of the tent affected their decision to flee (in their socks). But the theory that they were afraid of something in the forest fits with two members being well dressed as if on guard.  Nicolai was carrying a knife. The casefiles state that the footsteps indicate that two members were away from the tent and joined the group further on. My preference would be that Semyon was photographing the lights.

[Nigel Evans]

I was wondering why they had to mend holes/tears every evening when they stopped if they had just sewed them up the night before.  What are they doing to it?

Seems like the canvas was at the end of its useful life.