DPI/slab avalanche made it into Nature

[cz]

I was somewhat surprised to come across this one in Nature (the journal):

https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-020-00081-8#ref-CR1

Gaume & Puzrin study the plausibility of  a slab avalanche at the tent location. The upshot is that it requires a rather special combination of circumstances, but if they are  met, it is quite possible.

The authors do explicitly not promote any theory to explain the DPI but focus on this one aspect. Might be worthwhile to have a look for those interested in this route.

[Nicknonora]

It's not like people didn't know that a small slide wasn't one possibility.

But my gut is that it doesn't really add up.

[cz]

Sure. It's one of the oldest theories and the Russian officials' favorite. Didn't see anybody putting real physical modeling into it so far, so I think that is new.

Anyway, I agree it's not very convincing to explain the whole thing and they don't claim that.

[Manti]

While a slab avalanche (actually this is the most common type of avalanche) at the tent location is certainly a possibility:

• weather in the preceding days was reported to be unseasonably warm, "only" around -10C at noon
• then there could have been sudden cooling, strong winds, and heavy snowfall. sudden weather changes often help create the right conditions
• winds especially from NW put a "load" on the Eastern slope meaning snow is deposited there and this puts stress on lower layers of snow
• we don't precisely know where the tent was but it was on a slope. was it a 10° or a 30° slope? if closer to 30 again this can create avalanche conditions
• they created a "gap" in the snowpack when setting up the tent, weakening support for the snow above

So just purely looking at the location, an avalanche is not out of the question. But finding the tent the right way up, all the skis beneath perfectly lined up, their belongings in some sort of order inside, at least the layers being in the correct order (skis, backpacks, coats, blankets), doesn't this all but rule out that an avalanche actually occurred?

Could have there been an avalanche elsewhere nearby? Sure but that doesn't explain the DPI

[Investigator]

It's so disappointing that the majority of people can't simply study the evidence in a case like this, where there is abundant evidence.  Sure, some questions can never be answered, such as whether digging the "den" was part of the original plan or was decided at a later time, and whether it caused conflict among the nine, but why would one speculate about a natural phenomenon that has never been observed in that location when in fact we know the winds come roaring down that mountain and we know that their two tents sewn together were ripping apart during much better weather conditions and while they were using their stove for heat?  And how can one take seriously any investigators given money/resources to study the incident but don't do a basic reconstruction?

[Manti]

Ok now having read this article, I do have a reservation. While it is claimed that the chest injuries are caused by the impact of a snow slab, wouldn't that also break at least some of the skis underneath them?

Otherwise, despite it being unpopular, an avalanche theory can explain several things like cutting themselves out of the tent, leaving without more clothing as it was buried, but not the apparently longer survival of the most injured (the "ravine 4"). Or is that based on incorrect assumptions about clothing taken from the others?
It could be a possibility that they were injured in the tent, and their comrades helped them walk down the hill, but there they stopped showing signs of life, and were actually buried in the ravine by their friends. And later their friends perish due to cold. But this is contradicted by commonly held lore, for example the time when their watches stopped. Unless of course those in the ravine stopped at 8pm but others survived until 5am. Still, unexplained and contradictory details remain...

[Ziljoe]

This has just been put up. Explains the concept of the snow slab.

[RMK]

I was somewhat surprised to come across this one in Nature (the journal):

https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-020-00081-8#ref-CR1

Gaume & Puzrin study the plausibility of  a slab avalanche at the tent location. The upshot is that it requires a rather special combination of circumstances, but if they are  met, it is quite possible.

The authors do explicitly not promote any theory to explain the DPI but focus on this one aspect. Might be worthwhile to have a look for those interested in this route.

It's not Nature, though.  It's Communications Earth & Environment, just one of many scientific journals published by Nature Publishing Group "Nature Research" (which they're apparently called now).

[Ziljoe]

It's so disappointing that the majority of people can't simply study the evidence in a case like this, where there is abundant evidence.  Sure, some questions can never be answered, such as whether digging the "den" was part of the original plan or was decided at a later time, and whether it caused conflict among the nine, but why would one speculate about a natural phenomenon that has never been observed in that location when in fact we know the winds come roaring down that mountain and we know that their two tents sewn together were ripping apart during much better weather conditions and while they were using their stove for heat?  And how can one take seriously any investigators given money/resources to study the incident but don't do a basic reconstruction?

I don't know if you have seen this guy investigator , unfortunately it's in Russian . They have a number of videos in snow , night , and summer. It gives a feel for the place if nothing else. Some show the possible ravine location all linked on this site. You may have seen them already.

[eurocentric]

Half of what they're suggesting, the mechanics of it all, sounds perfectly plausible, and it also explains why the hikers didn't retrieve things, if the tent was then covered in snow and difficult, suffocating and scary to re-enter in the dark. But those are the only boxes it ticks.

Had there been such a devastating slab slip the larger chunks of snow should have remained, not just the smaller spoil seen on the tent when found, and there should be a corresponding area of slippage visible above the tent where the snow accumulated against the canvas, but instead the snow appeared to be intact.



It also implies their injuries happened then, and were that so there should be evidence of injury and pain, a struggle represented as walking difficulties in the snow, including falls. And any mechanical accident would not produce identical flail chest fractures, 4+4 to the right sides, to two hikers (whereas resus compressions would). It also doesn't explain a camera around Semyon's neck.

But where they really lost me was the video suggesting the slab slip happened while they were asleep. There's no way they would sleep in the tent without heating and while remaining half-dressed. So if this happened it needed to be while they were awake and following their meal (or during, given loin was found on a blanket).

[Nigel Evans]

There was a flashlight found on the tent?


So either it was placed there after the slide or there wasn't a slide? If the former then why not collect boots etc?


A non starter imo.

[Tony]

I saw this as well. If they wanted to be taken seriously they should have at least traveled to the area and conducted research at the site. At the very least, try and trigger an avalanche at the location.

It seems the avalanche expert doesn't have that much knowledge of the case other than stuff relevant to building a case around avalanche. It's also amusing that he states several times: "now, this normally wouldn't happen but..." He even gets wrong the timing of when the rib and head injuries occurred (which wasn't at the tent) and the fact that most, if not all, of the hikers were awake just before leaving the tent.

There are many many reasons why it most likely wasn't an avalanche:

1. There was hardly any snow on the tent. Most of the searchers stated that there was only 10cm of hard, wind-blown snow on top of the tent which they broke apart with an axe. There was so little snow that you can clearly see one of the ends and two skis are still standing.



M. Sharavin stated that when the tent was found the cuts were made to the leeward side of the tent with the windward side falling over on top of the "holes" (The cut was on the leeward side, and so it fell, as it were, on the holes...). If it were an avalanche, the force of the snow would have pushed the windward side of the tent over on top of leeward side. It makes no sense that if they were inside a tent with a layer of snow on top that the hiker who made the cuts would turn over and make cuts into the ground. Or, in the case that the leeward side was facing up (which isn't probable), that the cuts would be made and the hikers would later turn the windward side over on top of the cuts. Neither of these scenarios makes any sense. Also, it doesn't make sense that long cuts would be made to a collapsed tent. More likely, if the tent had collapsed on top of the hikers, a puncture would have been made and the hikers would have torn the canvas rather than make a long, drawn-out cut since it would be difficult to make a cut to non-rigid material. The only scenario that makes sense is that the tent was cut while the tent was upright and tight. This alone would immediately rule out avalanche.

2. The avalanche expert is inconsistent with the amount of snow that slid on top of the tent. In one part of the video he explains that there could have been several hundred kilograms on top of the tent but then later suggests that the amount of snow was so small that it would have only filled in the area that they dug out which, from examining the final two photos, it appears that the area they dug out was only done so to level out the ground and there wouldn't have been an overly large amount of snow required to "fill in" the hole cut by the hikers. So, which is it? There was an enormous amount of snow that crushed skulls and fractured ribs, depositing tons of weight on top which would have resulted in none of the hikers escaping (sorry, no one is digging their way out of hundreds of kilograms of snow)? Or, There was just a small amount of snow that caused the hikers to cut the tent and then proceed to walk 1500 meters down a cold, completely dark, wind-blown slope leaving nearly everything besides the clothes on their backs? Neither of these scenarios makes any sense.

There is also no way of knowing how much snow accumulated during the few hours that they were in the tent. By all accounts it wasn't much as the three found returning to the tent were barely covered with snow. In the photos of Zina, Igor, and Rustem (who were found closest to the tent) it appears there be between 6 inches and a foot of snow which, after 2 weeks, is not much. In any case there is no way of know just how much snow accumulated behind the tent and on top of the hole they cut. But, in order to make a case for avalanche, the video will conclude that there was a lot of snow.

3. Other than the actual canvas tent, nothing found inside was overly disturbed. Many of the searchers testified that nothing inside the tent looked out of place or overly disturbed. Several stated that it was almost as if they all just got up and left. Most of their footwear was found in a corner of the tent. Does it seem logical that several hundred kilograms of snow slid on top of the hikers where by they cut and then dug their way out, barely escaping with their lives, and absolutely nothing inside the tent was found that would give searchers or investigators a clue that it might have been an avalanche?

4. Why, after walking 1500 meters to the cedar, did Zina, Igor, and Rustem finally decide to try and return to the tent. If it had been an avalanche, what were they hoping had changed at the site of the tent? What was there that would have been of aid to the hikers that wasn't there moments after they left? If it was an avalanche - nothing. They would have returned only to find the exact same scenario they left earlier. Was it necessary to walk 1500 meters to realize that they needed their valenki, coat, gloves, etc.?

5. Finally, there has never been a recorded avalanche on Kholat Syakhl (as far as I know). Hundreds of people have been to the area. As we have seen in videos already posted, many have spent the night. Hikers walk up and down the slope with little to no fear of avalanche. To make a case for avalanche, it would almost certainly require traveling to the area and triggering an avalanche in the area above the tent. But as far as I know, has not happened.

A final note: when I was younger I was in a tent that collapsed during a cold windy night due to snow accumulation. The tent was large and made of nylon and collapsed with around a foot or so of snow on top. I was in a part of the tent that only partially collapsed. I was lazy and remember not wanting to get out to shovel off snow. Eventually I got out and we cleared off the snow, set the tent back up, got back in and went to sleep.

[eurocentric]

The slip theory would have worked better if it was all about the trench spoil and enough of it, any of it, had been thrown up slope.

They dug a 3ft deep >12x4 trench. Approximately 144 square feet. In weight that's around 3,146.4 - 3,595.7lbs, or approximately 1.5 ton.

https://www.inchcalculator.com/snow-weight-calculator/

Had half of that been thrown up slope, it would mean 1797lbs, 3/4 of a ton, or the weight of 15 people, could get blown down onto the tent during a sudden strong wind.

If that happened the tent would collapse on top of them, the air would be pushed out of the flap end and wind sock, they would be in darkness, feeling like they were going to suffocate, and they may cut their way out and then find it impossible to get back in again to retrieve things without the snow collapsing in on top of them.

But...no trench spoil up slope.

Trench digging, no spoil thrown up slope, skis and rucksacks there:


Trench spoil found below the tent:

[Tony]

The slip theory would have worked better if it was all about the trench spoil and enough of it, any of it, had been thrown up slope.

They dug a 3ft deep >12x4 trench. Approximately 144 square feet. In weight that's around 3,146.4 - 3,595.7lbs, or approximately 1.5 ton.

https://www.inchcalculator.com/snow-weight-calculator/

Had half of that been thrown up slope, it would mean 1797lbs, 3/4 of a ton, or the weight of 15 people, could get blown down onto the tent during a sudden strong wind.

If that happened the tent would collapse on top of them, the air would be pushed out of the flap end and wind sock, they would be in darkness, feeling like they were going to suffocate, and they may cut their way out and then find it impossible to get back in again to retrieve things without the snow collapsing in on top of them.

But...no trench spoil up slope.

I understand that you're not arguing for avalanche but it's hard to imagine digging out of 1797lbs of snow. Even with small avalanches when snow collapses and slides down on top of someone, all that weight immediately makes it impossible for any type of movement. In the state where I am from, there are only two cases where the victim dug themselves out of an avalanche and, in both cases, the person was only partially covered. In one case, it took the guy two hours to dig out of snow waist deep because it had solidified around him making it extremely difficult to dig through. Even in very small avalanches, if the person is completely covered by snow, there is almost no chance of them being able to dig themselves out simply because they are not able to move.

If 3/4 of a ton of snow had come down on top of the tent that night, none of the hikers would have gotten out.

Here is a link to surviving an avalanche https://www.popsci.com/caught-in-an-avalanche/ - Here is a quote from the article:

"If you are very fortunate, you will wind up only partially buried, or with your arm sticking up out of the snow. If your elbow is free, you might be able to push a little bit of snow out of the way so you can clear a path down to your mouth and nose.

But you probably won’t be able to move at all. “You can’t even really struggle, you’re locked in and encased in snow,” Van Tilburg says. “It is so tightly packed it’s like cement.” There have been cases, he says, where people brought their skis and snowboards to dig through avalanche debris, only to have them break upon the unforgiving snow.

You must now hope that your buddies have practiced with their avalanche rescue gear and can find you quickly. “If you end up completely buried, really—and this is going to be next to impossible—the best thing you can do is just relax,” Birkeland says. “At that point, your fate lies almost entirely in the hands of your partners.”

[sarapuk]

This is like the Authorities line on what happened or what they would like people to think happened. There was no Avalanche of any kind that caused the demise of the Dyatlov Group.

[SimplyMadness]

Half of what they're suggesting, the mechanics of it all, sounds perfectly plausible, and it also explains why the hikers didn't retrieve things, if the tent was then covered in snow and difficult, suffocating and scary to re-enter in the dark. But those are the only boxes it ticks.

Had there been such a devastating slab slip the larger chunks of snow should have remained, not just the smaller spoil seen on the tent when found, and there should be a corresponding area of slippage visible above the tent where the snow accumulated against the canvas, but instead the snow appeared to be intact.



It also implies their injuries happened then, and were that so there should be evidence of injury and pain, a struggle represented as walking difficulties in the snow, including falls. And any mechanical accident would not produce identical flail chest fractures, 4+4 to the right sides, to two hikers (whereas resus compressions would). It also doesn't explain a camera around Semyon's neck.

But where they really lost me was the video suggesting the slab slip happened while they were asleep. There's no way they would sleep in the tent without heating and while remaining half-dressed. So if this happened it needed to be while they were awake and following their meal (or during, given loin was found on a blanket).

I don’t think the slab has to be all that devastating to partially collapse a tent and break some ribs.

If the slab of snow hit them in the right side why would it not crack all of the ribs on the right side?

They were likely exhausted when they set up the tent and Semyon just went to bed with the camera case around his neck. I personally don’t think this particular detail is as important as people make it out to be.

I see the footprint evidence differently. If the group is forced to aide their injured friends in walking, then that would slow their escape down and give the impression of a “calm” descent down the slope.


 

[Manti]

Half of what they're suggesting, the mechanics of it all, sounds perfectly plausible, and it also explains why the hikers didn't retrieve things, if the tent was then covered in snow and difficult, suffocating and scary to re-enter in the dark. But those are the only boxes it ticks.

Had there been such a devastating slab slip the larger chunks of snow should have remained, not just the smaller spoil seen on the tent when found, and there should be a corresponding area of slippage visible above the tent where the snow accumulated against the canvas, but instead the snow appeared to be intact.



It also implies their injuries happened then, and were that so there should be evidence of injury and pain, a struggle represented as walking difficulties in the snow, including falls. And any mechanical accident would not produce identical flail chest fractures, 4+4 to the right sides, to two hikers (whereas resus compressions would). It also doesn't explain a camera around Semyon's neck.

But where they really lost me was the video suggesting the slab slip happened while they were asleep. There's no way they would sleep in the tent without heating and while remaining half-dressed. So if this happened it needed to be while they were awake and following their meal (or during, given loin was found on a blanket).

I don’t think the slab has to be all that devastating to partially collapse a tent and break some ribs.

If the slab of snow hit them in the right side why would it not crack all of the ribs on the right side?

They were likely exhausted when they set up the tent and Semyon just went to bed with the camera case around his neck. I personally don’t think this particular detail is as important as people make it out to be.

I see the footprint evidence differently. If the group is forced to aide their injured friends in walking, then that would slow their escape down and give the impression of a “calm” descent down the slope.


 

Regarding this photo, whose skis are those? Is this even a photo of the tent site? Did the searchers arrive on skis and decided to dunk them into the snow all around the tent they found? Isn't it more likely that these are around their backpacks? (If the searchers carried backpacks).

Or did they dig up the Dyatlov Group's skis from under the tent and set them up in this configuration for some reason? Why would they do that?I don't think this photo depicts the tent at all...

[Manti]

Also, I wrote before how unusual the snow looks in the searchers' photos. Now having watched this YouTube video (not the one from the Swiss researchers but the Russian one), it shows perfectly normal snow on Kholat.

Yet the snow in the search photos, at least at the tent's altitude is layered and the layers are quite thin, very heavily eroded (by wind?), and has "dents" on the surface all over the place. It looks like layers of ice almost. Does anyone have an idea how this type of snow could have formed on the mountain? Especially the dents.. these wouldn't be formed by snow being blown against the snow on the ground. I would expect "smooth" snow in this area like in fact the Russian video shows or similarly even the Swiss one or really you can look for any random video about snow in any remote mountainous area, you will see that its surface is smooth and soft.

Perhaps the wind was so strong it picked up the upper layers of snow and we're looking at the exposed layer of firn? But even then it seems the hardened layers themselves tore off in many places... How can almost icy sheets form on the low temperatures that dominate there?

[Ziljoe]

Half of what they're suggesting, the mechanics of it all, sounds perfectly plausible, and it also explains why the hikers didn't retrieve things, if the tent was then covered in snow and difficult, suffocating and scary to re-enter in the dark. But those are the only boxes it ticks.

Had there been such a devastating slab slip the larger chunks of snow should have remained, not just the smaller spoil seen on the tent when found, and there should be a corresponding area of slippage visible above the tent where the snow accumulated against the canvas, but instead the snow appeared to be intact.



It also implies their injuries happened then, and were that so there should be evidence of injury and pain, a struggle represented as walking difficulties in the snow, including falls. And any mechanical accident would not produce identical flail chest fractures, 4+4 to the right sides, to two hikers (whereas resus compressions would). It also doesn't explain a camera around Semyon's neck.

But where they really lost me was the video suggesting the slab slip happened while they were asleep. There's no way they would sleep in the tent without heating and while remaining half-dressed. So if this happened it needed to be while they were awake and following their meal (or during, given loin was found on a blanket).

I don’t think the slab has to be all that devastating to partially collapse a tent and break some ribs.

If the slab of snow hit them in the right side why would it not crack all of the ribs on the right side?

They were likely exhausted when they set up the tent and Semyon just went to bed with the camera case around his neck. I personally don’t think this particular detail is as important as people make it out to be.

I see the footprint evidence differently. If the group is forced to aide their injured friends in walking, then that would slow their escape down and give the impression of a “calm” descent down the slope.


 

Regarding this photo, whose skis are those? Is this even a photo of the tent site? Did the searchers arrive on skis and decided to dunk them into the snow all around the tent they found? Isn't it more likely that these are around their backpacks? (If the searchers carried backpacks).

Or did they dig up the Dyatlov Group's skis from under the tent and set them up in this configuration for some reason? Why would they do that?I don't think this photo depicts the tent at all...

I believe the photo is after the searchers have dug the tent out/emptied the equipment .There are other photos on the main site that make it clearer. I haven't quite worked out how to link photos yet.   

[sarapuk]

Half of what they're suggesting, the mechanics of it all, sounds perfectly plausible, and it also explains why the hikers didn't retrieve things, if the tent was then covered in snow and difficult, suffocating and scary to re-enter in the dark. But those are the only boxes it ticks.

Had there been such a devastating slab slip the larger chunks of snow should have remained, not just the smaller spoil seen on the tent when found, and there should be a corresponding area of slippage visible above the tent where the snow accumulated against the canvas, but instead the snow appeared to be intact.



It also implies their injuries happened then, and were that so there should be evidence of injury and pain, a struggle represented as walking difficulties in the snow, including falls. And any mechanical accident would not produce identical flail chest fractures, 4+4 to the right sides, to two hikers (whereas resus compressions would). It also doesn't explain a camera around Semyon's neck.

But where they really lost me was the video suggesting the slab slip happened while they were asleep. There's no way they would sleep in the tent without heating and while remaining half-dressed. So if this happened it needed to be while they were awake and following their meal (or during, given loin was found on a blanket).

I don’t think the slab has to be all that devastating to partially collapse a tent and break some ribs.

If the slab of snow hit them in the right side why would it not crack all of the ribs on the right side?

They were likely exhausted when they set up the tent and Semyon just went to bed with the camera case around his neck. I personally don’t think this particular detail is as important as people make it out to be.

I see the footprint evidence differently. If the group is forced to aide their injured friends in walking, then that would slow their escape down and give the impression of a “calm” descent down the slope.


 

But if the Dyatlov Group had time to gather the injured and leave the Tent then they would also have had time to collect their essential clothing and other materials.

[eurocentric]

Half of what they're suggesting, the mechanics of it all, sounds perfectly plausible, and it also explains why the hikers didn't retrieve things, if the tent was then covered in snow and difficult, suffocating and scary to re-enter in the dark. But those are the only boxes it ticks.

Had there been such a devastating slab slip the larger chunks of snow should have remained, not just the smaller spoil seen on the tent when found, and there should be a corresponding area of slippage visible above the tent where the snow accumulated against the canvas, but instead the snow appeared to be intact.



It also implies their injuries happened then, and were that so there should be evidence of injury and pain, a struggle represented as walking difficulties in the snow, including falls. And any mechanical accident would not produce identical flail chest fractures, 4+4 to the right sides, to two hikers (whereas resus compressions would). It also doesn't explain a camera around Semyon's neck.

But where they really lost me was the video suggesting the slab slip happened while they were asleep. There's no way they would sleep in the tent without heating and while remaining half-dressed. So if this happened it needed to be while they were awake and following their meal (or during, given loin was found on a blanket).

I don’t think the slab has to be all that devastating to partially collapse a tent and break some ribs.

If the slab of snow hit them in the right side why would it not crack all of the ribs on the right side?

They were likely exhausted when they set up the tent and Semyon just went to bed with the camera case around his neck. I personally don’t think this particular detail is as important as people make it out to be.

I see the footprint evidence differently. If the group is forced to aide their injured friends in walking, then that would slow their escape down and give the impression of a “calm” descent down the slope.


 

Regarding this photo, whose skis are those? Is this even a photo of the tent site? Did the searchers arrive on skis and decided to dunk them into the snow all around the tent they found? Isn't it more likely that these are around their backpacks? (If the searchers carried backpacks).

Or did they dig up the Dyatlov Group's skis from under the tent and set them up in this configuration for some reason? Why would they do that?I don't think this photo depicts the tent at all...

The photo is from the search. The tent has been taken down and is off to the right, and in front of where the tent was is a pile of recovered contents, and around the site the hiker skis appear to be arranged. There will be more than 18 because they had some spares.

[eurocentric]

The slip theory would have worked better if it was all about the trench spoil and enough of it, any of it, had been thrown up slope.

They dug a 3ft deep >12x4 trench. Approximately 144 square feet. In weight that's around 3,146.4 - 3,595.7lbs, or approximately 1.5 ton.

https://www.inchcalculator.com/snow-weight-calculator/

Had half of that been thrown up slope, it would mean 1797lbs, 3/4 of a ton, or the weight of 15 people, could get blown down onto the tent during a sudden strong wind.

If that happened the tent would collapse on top of them, the air would be pushed out of the flap end and wind sock, they would be in darkness, feeling like they were going to suffocate, and they may cut their way out and then find it impossible to get back in again to retrieve things without the snow collapsing in on top of them.

But...no trench spoil up slope.

I understand that you're not arguing for avalanche but it's hard to imagine digging out of 1797lbs of snow. Even with small avalanches when snow collapses and slides down on top of someone, all that weight immediately makes it impossible for any type of movement. In the state where I am from, there are only two cases where the victim dug themselves out of an avalanche and, in both cases, the person was only partially covered. In one case, it took the guy two hours to dig out of snow waist deep because it had solidified around him making it extremely difficult to dig through. Even in very small avalanches, if the person is completely covered by snow, there is almost no chance of them being able to dig themselves out simply because they are not able to move.

If 3/4 of a ton of snow had come down on top of the tent that night, none of the hikers would have gotten out.

Here is a link to surviving an avalanche https://www.popsci.com/caught-in-an-avalanche/ - Here is a quote from the article:

"If you are very fortunate, you will wind up only partially buried, or with your arm sticking up out of the snow. If your elbow is free, you might be able to push a little bit of snow out of the way so you can clear a path down to your mouth and nose.

But you probably won’t be able to move at all. “You can’t even really struggle, you’re locked in and encased in snow,” Van Tilburg says. “It is so tightly packed it’s like cement.” There have been cases, he says, where people brought their skis and snowboards to dig through avalanche debris, only to have them break upon the unforgiving snow.

You must now hope that your buddies have practiced with their avalanche rescue gear and can find you quickly. “If you end up completely buried, really—and this is going to be next to impossible—the best thing you can do is just relax,” Birkeland says. “At that point, your fate lies almost entirely in the hands of your partners.”

You're right, but it doesn't automatically follow that when trying to imagine how else a load of snow could end up on the tent from above it means the windblown stuff all arrives in an instant and is uniformedly spread across the entire 12ft length of the tent, whereas the slab slip would be a single, rapid event. So there might have been some pockets to escape through.

[SimplyMadness]

Half of what they're suggesting, the mechanics of it all, sounds perfectly plausible, and it also explains why the hikers didn't retrieve things, if the tent was then covered in snow and difficult, suffocating and scary to re-enter in the dark. But those are the only boxes it ticks.

Had there been such a devastating slab slip the larger chunks of snow should have remained, not just the smaller spoil seen on the tent when found, and there should be a corresponding area of slippage visible above the tent where the snow accumulated against the canvas, but instead the snow appeared to be intact.



It also implies their injuries happened then, and were that so there should be evidence of injury and pain, a struggle represented as walking difficulties in the snow, including falls. And any mechanical accident would not produce identical flail chest fractures, 4+4 to the right sides, to two hikers (whereas resus compressions would). It also doesn't explain a camera around Semyon's neck.

But where they really lost me was the video suggesting the slab slip happened while they were asleep. There's no way they would sleep in the tent without heating and while remaining half-dressed. So if this happened it needed to be while they were awake and following their meal (or during, given loin was found on a blanket).

I don’t think the slab has to be all that devastating to partially collapse a tent and break some ribs.

If the slab of snow hit them in the right side why would it not crack all of the ribs on the right side?

They were likely exhausted when they set up the tent and Semyon just went to bed with the camera case around his neck. I personally don’t think this particular detail is as important as people make it out to be.

I see the footprint evidence differently. If the group is forced to aide their injured friends in walking, then that would slow their escape down and give the impression of a “calm” descent down the slope.


 

But if the Dyatlov Group had time to gather the injured and leave the Tent then they would also have had time to collect their essential clothing and other materials.

I don't think that is necessarily the case. They've just been hit with a slab of snow and ice in the middle of the night, the tent has partially collapsed and they have wounded. They have no way of knowing if this isn't the beginning of a larger avalanche or snow slide and in panic they would feel the need to evacuate to the cover of the forest immediately.

[Manti]

They have no way of knowing if this isn't the beginning of a larger avalanche or snow slide and in panic they would feel the need to evacuate to the cover of the forest immediately.

To the contrary I think if they were expecting another  avalanche they would know to go anywhere but downhill, to avoid being  buried by it. The forest was not that close to provide immediate  protection.

[Nicknonora]

I think the explanation is emotional and not physical or scientific.

[sarapuk]

Half of what they're suggesting, the mechanics of it all, sounds perfectly plausible, and it also explains why the hikers didn't retrieve things, if the tent was then covered in snow and difficult, suffocating and scary to re-enter in the dark. But those are the only boxes it ticks.

Had there been such a devastating slab slip the larger chunks of snow should have remained, not just the smaller spoil seen on the tent when found, and there should be a corresponding area of slippage visible above the tent where the snow accumulated against the canvas, but instead the snow appeared to be intact.



It also implies their injuries happened then, and were that so there should be evidence of injury and pain, a struggle represented as walking difficulties in the snow, including falls. And any mechanical accident would not produce identical flail chest fractures, 4+4 to the right sides, to two hikers (whereas resus compressions would). It also doesn't explain a camera around Semyon's neck.

But where they really lost me was the video suggesting the slab slip happened while they were asleep. There's no way they would sleep in the tent without heating and while remaining half-dressed. So if this happened it needed to be while they were awake and following their meal (or during, given loin was found on a blanket).

I don’t think the slab has to be all that devastating to partially collapse a tent and break some ribs.

If the slab of snow hit them in the right side why would it not crack all of the ribs on the right side?

They were likely exhausted when they set up the tent and Semyon just went to bed with the camera case around his neck. I personally don’t think this particular detail is as important as people make it out to be.

I see the footprint evidence differently. If the group is forced to aide their injured friends in walking, then that would slow their escape down and give the impression of a “calm” descent down the slope.


 

But if the Dyatlov Group had time to gather the injured and leave the Tent then they would also have had time to collect their essential clothing and other materials.

I don't think that is necessarily the case. They've just been hit with a slab of snow and ice in the middle of the night, the tent has partially collapsed and they have wounded. They have no way of knowing if this isn't the beginning of a larger avalanche or snow slide and in panic they would feel the need to evacuate to the cover of the forest immediately.

If the slab of snow and ice was that bad then there would be serious damage to the Tent as well as the Dyatlov Group. The injuries to some of the Dyatlov Group were that bad that there is no way that they could have walked a mile.

[eurocentric]

Their idea is still doing the rounds:

https://uk.yahoo.com/movies/frozen-animation-code-helped-engineers-235032357.html

[DAXXY]

Their idea is still doing the rounds:

https://uk.yahoo.com/movies/frozen-animation-code-helped-engineers-235032357.html

This whole avalanche idea could simply come from poor translation like much of this incident. It could mean something like 'crushing weight of snow' because a snow den they were in collapsed. It may not mean 'avalanche as we know it in English. 

[sarapuk]

Their idea is still doing the rounds:

https://uk.yahoo.com/movies/frozen-animation-code-helped-engineers-235032357.html

Well originally, back in 1959, the Authourities played safe and said ''Overwhelming Force''.

[DAXXY]

Their idea is still doing the rounds:

https://uk.yahoo.com/movies/frozen-animation-code-helped-engineers-235032357.html

Well originally, back in 1959, the Authourities played safe and said ''Overwhelming Force''.

And the 'ravine' could be a ditch or gully, just translated poorly.  There may even be names in Russian for a ditch or gully that could have been used if the translator knew about them.