How cold in the tent with no heat?

[sarapuk]

How were they well dressed in the tent? Not what I would call well dressed for those temps in a tent that had holes in it. a coat? was plugging one hole from what I've read.

They had the usual outdoor gear for those conditions. The Tent wasnt that bad.

[tenne]

All I was pointing out was the materials used in the videos is not what was available then and the one old tent, they had a fire.

[Nigel Evans]

I just had a talk with an old trapper who trapped in Northern Ontario for years. He said NO WAY! not in those materials and with no fire. I showed him the photos and he just laughed at the thought that they would be dressed like that in the tent under those conditions.

Did you explain that they seem to have dug down one metre and probably created a snow cave (flashlight on 10cm of firn snow) which could raise the temperature from -40C to 0C?

I showed him the photos and he couldn’t see any evidence of them digging a snow cave and he isn’t the only one to say that. There is no evidence of it

i agree. And this is an important fact, again overlooked, like so many important facts that are overlooked for some reason, on this Forum. It appears that they set the Tent up quickly not having the time or strength to dig any foundations.

The two photos of them standing waist deep in a trench and a flashlight on 10cm of snow has become "no evidence"? Hmmm. Seems like a no brainer to me, Use the snow to insulate the sides. Use the skis and bags to insulate the floor.

[sarapuk]

I just had a talk with an old trapper who trapped in Northern Ontario for years. He said NO WAY! not in those materials and with no fire. I showed him the photos and he just laughed at the thought that they would be dressed like that in the tent under those conditions.

Did you explain that they seem to have dug down one metre and probably created a snow cave (flashlight on 10cm of firn snow) which could raise the temperature from -40C to 0C?

I showed him the photos and he couldn’t see any evidence of them digging a snow cave and he isn’t the only one to say that. There is no evidence of it

i agree. And this is an important fact, again overlooked, like so many important facts that are overlooked for some reason, on this Forum. It appears that they set the Tent up quickly not having the time or strength to dig any foundations.

The two photos of them standing waist deep in a trench and a flashlight on 10cm of snow has become "no evidence"? Hmmm. Seems like a no brainer to me, Use the snow to insulate the sides. Use the skis and bags to insulate the floor.

Trench  1 ? I suppose it depends on ones interpretation of what a Trench is.

[ash73]

They certainly dug out a level base, it was probably quite well protected on the windward side, but the entrance was exposed to the wind you can see the snow build-up on the search team photo. They hung a sheet inside to block the wind but it wouldn't be very pleasant when anyone stepped out of the tent.

I think the snow was thrown on top of the tent when they evacuated, which would mean they were standing outside in a freezing cold blizzard for several minutes, and they had to move down the slope to escape the wind.

[Investigator]

Tony, thank you for all of those videos!!

I admit that I've camped less in colder weather in the last decade and a half than previous.  That is mostly owing to health and preference.  I did it in my twenties and loved it but in my forties, I can chose not to, lol!! 

There are always tips and tricks to help with camping in extreme temps.  In the middle of summer at our biggest reenactment, we have thousands of people crammed into a large open field where there is no shade.  With the heat index, it can be over 100F on the worst of days.  We use heavy fabrics under the roof canvas to help block the direct sun, which diminishes the temps in the tent by more than 10 degrees.  We've done this in cold, as well, to help add an insulating factor and again, the difference can be noticeable.  I know the Dyatlov group used "sheets" inside.  I wish I knew more about those; when I first saw that, I was thinking of the thin cotton bed sheets but like many translations, I think they would be somewhat more substantial than that, else why bother bringing them? 

I still do not think that camping on that very ridge in that spot was a good choice as so few people have ever actually done it in winter conditions.

Right, you have to try and recreate the exact conditions, which also includes two old army tents of that same type, sewn together, and coming apart at the seams during much better weather conditions.  Here are two quotes from the book, "Off the Wall" (which may have relevance to the DPI):

Late during that Tuesday morning Ranger James Holcomb, still alone, finally found the elusive tent. It had collapsed and had been partly snowed under. This explains his difficulty in finding it. As Holcomb neared it, he next saw that the door of the flattened tent lay open. Klingenberg, hatless, lay sprawled within this opening. Eclipsing any hope that Holcomb had arrived in the nick of time, snow now covered the prone man’s lower body. The autopsy revealed Klingenberg had died of “cold and exposure” a day earlier, on Monday morning.

Because of Lyman’s decision to travel light, he had left himself vulnerable to the mind-sapping effects of hypothermia on that ledge where he had dumped his clothing in a wet, soon-to-be-frozen, heap.

This quote seems familiar to me.  Have you posted about it before?  Sometimes I forget what I've read where, lol.

I know I quoted from that book before, but not sure about the exact quotes.

[Investigator]

They certainly dug out a level base, it was probably quite well protected on the windward side, but the entrance was exposed to the wind you can see the snow build-up on the search team photo. They hung a sheet inside to block the wind but it wouldn't be very pleasant when anyone stepped out of the tent.

I think the snow was thrown on top of the tent when they evacuated, which would mean they were standing outside in a freezing cold blizzard for several minutes, and they had to move down the slope to escape the wind.

I thought side of the tent with the apparent cuts was facing the wind; someone claimed that it was a bad idea and that the short end, opposite the opening, was what should have been facing the wind (which seems like common sense).  Otherwise, yes, the evidence suggests they decided to secure the tent (and that that was their top priority), but it's unclear what led to that decision (if it was about to collapse and they couldn't stop, then cutting themselves out and securing it certainly does not seem unreasonable).  They saw a forest below, and they were correct about getting to it without difficulty, but then suriving down there was a big mistake, at least the way they went about it (and the "ravine 4" may have just been really unlucky).

[ash73]

I thought side of the tent with the apparent cuts was facing the wind

The case file says "there are numerous damages, especially on the right slant of the canopy forming the roof", right side being the leeward (downwind) side, facing down the slope. There was also a large cut at the back of the tent, spotted later.

[Tony]

They certainly dug out a level base, it was probably quite well protected on the windward side, but the entrance was exposed to the wind you can see the snow build-up on the search team photo. They hung a sheet inside to block the wind but it wouldn't be very pleasant when anyone stepped out of the tent.

I think the snow was thrown on top of the tent when they evacuated, which would mean they were standing outside in a freezing cold blizzard for several minutes, and they had to move down the slope to escape the wind.

I thought side of the tent with the apparent cuts was facing the wind; someone claimed that it was a bad idea and that the short end, opposite the opening, was what should have been facing the wind (which seems like common sense).  Otherwise, yes, the evidence suggests they decided to secure the tent (and that that was their top priority), but it's unclear what led to that decision (if it was about to collapse and they couldn't stop, then cutting themselves out and securing it certainly does not seem unreasonable).  They saw a forest below, and they were correct about getting to it without difficulty, but then suriving down there was a big mistake, at least the way they went about it (and the "ravine 4" may have just been really unlucky).

There were rips found on both the leeward and windward side of the tent. However, the 3 large documented cuts were found on the leeward side of the tent.

This is what M. Sharavin stated regarding the cut (at the time he only presumed one cut):

"The cut was on the leeward side, and so it fell, as it were, on the holes..."

He also commented that there were signs of multiple attempts to cut the tent from the inside that were unsuccessful.

Although (I think) this is the only comment made regarding which side of the tent had the cuts, the drawing in the case files also eludes to this. It also states "In the camping tent of Dyatlov group on the right slant of the canopy forming the roof, three damages of approximately 32, 89, and 42 cm in length /conditionally numbered 1, 2, 3 / are made with some sharp weapon /knife/ i.e. are cuts." If looking from the front, this would be the leeward side.

[Investigator]

If we can say for sure there were attempts to cut the tent from the inside, that would suggest they thought the tent would collapse or they heard a noise and thought something like an avalanche was occurring (or it was a kind of unwise survivalist exercise or punishment), because then they secured the tent and deliberately walked down to the tree line.  A reconstruction would likely provide us with enough evidence to say with a reasonably high degree of certainty which one.  However, more than one attempt to cut it open that failed suggests it was iced up and so didn't cut easily, and that's a reconstruction anyone living in a cold climate can do themselves (that is, get a piece of heavy canvas, ice it up on one side, and try to cut it with a similar kind of knife on the non-iced side).

[sarapuk]

If we can say for sure there were attempts to cut the tent from the inside, that would suggest they thought the tent would collapse or they heard a noise and thought something like an avalanche was occurring (or it was a kind of unwise survivalist exercise or punishment), because then they secured the tent and deliberately walked down to the tree line.  A reconstruction would likely provide us with enough evidence to say with a reasonably high degree of certainty which one.  However, more than one attempt to cut it open that failed suggests it was iced up and so didn't cut easily, and that's a reconstruction anyone living in a cold climate can do themselves (that is, get a piece of heavy canvas, ice it up on one side, and try to cut it with a similar kind of knife on the non-iced side).

Problem is we can not say for sure anything about the Tent. And having it go missing means we can not examine it.

[Tony]

If we can say for sure there were attempts to cut the tent from the inside, that would suggest they thought the tent would collapse or they heard a noise and thought something like an avalanche was occurring (or it was a kind of unwise survivalist exercise or punishment), because then they secured the tent and deliberately walked down to the tree line.  A reconstruction would likely provide us with enough evidence to say with a reasonably high degree of certainty which one.  However, more than one attempt to cut it open that failed suggests it was iced up and so didn't cut easily, and that's a reconstruction anyone living in a cold climate can do themselves (that is, get a piece of heavy canvas, ice it up on one side, and try to cut it with a similar kind of knife on the non-iced side).

It would be an interesting experiment to conduct. I would think if the knife was even a little bit dull it would be difficult to cut through heavy canvas.

Here's what Sharavin stated in his interview:

MSh: "The fact that [the tent] was cut from inside we could see even before the [oficial] examination, while taking the tent apart."

YK: "You take a knife stick and pull towards you..."

MSh: "Outside, it would have been thrust once and dragged, and there were several attempts, several cuts from the inside, such weak punctures in the tent fabric were observed and then only a cut. We found this when examining the section still in place, and then the examination confirmed this. This this is not a gap, so it goes obliquely of the fibers, and the gap is either vertically or horizontally, where it is weaker there. We cut down part of the tent with an ice ax, i.e. we cut from the top through the bottom. We did damage, you could say it was necessary .. we had to find out if there was somebody inside, but I think that it could be done differently, it wasn't necessary to cut the tent."

I think it could have been stabbing at the tent and the blade slipping out before it could start the cut. The forensic examiner also noted some of these scrapes along the inside. The examiner only noted three cuts (even though she states "not all cuts are shown on the scheme"). The cuts are strange in and of themselves because they run more horizontally than vertically. When comparing the actual photograph of the tent to the scheme drawn up by Churkina, it almost appears that the photograph is reversed. Not being able to see the side where the stove pipe would fit makes it difficult to tell what's going on in the photograph. For example, the large vertical tear/cut? on the left side of the tent in the photograph https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/Dyatlov-pass-tent-02.jpg is shown on the right side by Churkina here https://dyatlovpass.com/resources/340/gallery/Dyatlov-pass-case-files-Churkina-photo-01-en.jpg.

So, I don't know about the cuts. I guess the only thing I can add is that it seems more likely they were made while the tent was taut and not after it had collapsed.

[Manti]

Did you explain that they seem to have dug down one metre and probably created a snow cave (flashlight on 10cm of firn snow) which could raise the temperature from -40C to 0C?

Firn snow takes around a year to form. This area of the Urals is warm in the summer and all snow melts.

Also 10cm of any kind of snow is not sufficient to provide much insulation and moreover if you raise the temperature to 0C somehow you will have a "drip problem" and soon wet blankets and clothing.

[Investigator]

Responding to:  "The cuts are strange in and of themselves because they run more horizontally than vertically."

They may have tried to cut horizontally first but couldn't get enough force that way, due to the small size of the tent (can't stand up).  If you are kneeling and use two hands on the knife, I think you can cut with a lot more force if you do so vertically (starting as high as you can and pushing down).  The idea to cut horizontally may have beeen due to how the heavy snow/ice had formed, if they did try to cut that way first.

I'll also mention that most items they took with them to that site were found positioned in a neat/orderly way, and this suggests they acted quickly and thought those items would be reasonably well preserved in place.  The idea that this was stage is far-fetched, to put it nicely, but regardless, you go with the evidence you have, or else you are "assuming facts not in evidence," and so should be working on obtaining that evidence, rather than suggesting the actual evidence has been faked.  It's not as easy to fake crime scenes, say a husband killing his wife in a house that they share (with nobody else living there), so the idea that this type of scene, which is consistent with simple bad decision-making in a hostile environment, should be tossed aside is just ridiculous (to those who are making such claims).  But I welcome attempts at reconstructing all or part of the incident, as that always seems to lead to new or interesting revelations.

[tenne]

If it had been staged properly, we wouldn't have all these inconsistences, much like the husband trying to fake a scene at the house. this is hardly as well done job but well within their capabilities.

The reason nothing adds up is it is all a lie. if that is what happened then we would be able to come up with a reason that they camped there, with no heat and improper clothing for that cold, walked down the slope a kilometer, lit a fire and then left it, make a den in another place with no access to fire wood. Get horrible injuries and then die.

If it happened that way, it would all add up. it doesn't so it didn't happen. like putting the rifle in the wrong hand and calling it a suicide. yes there is a dead body but how it happened? the evidence for suicide doesn't fit because it wasn't one. if it was, then it would be a revolver in the right hand.

[Investigator]

If it had been staged properly, we wouldn't have all these inconsistences, much like the husband trying to fake a scene at the house. this is hardly as well done job but well within their capabilities.

The reason nothing adds up is it is all a lie. if that is what happened then we would be able to come up with a reason that they camped there, with no heat and improper clothing for that cold, walked down the slope a kilometer, lit a fire and then left it, make a den in another place with no access to fire wood. Get horrible injuries and then die.

If it happened that way, it would all add up. it doesn't so it didn't happen. like putting the rifle in the wrong hand and calling it a suicide. yes there is a dead body but how it happened? the evidence for suicide doesn't fit because it wasn't one. if it was, then it would be a revolver in the right hand.

Apparently, you didn't read my post from perhaps a week ago, where I quoted Pat Brown in her book about the criminal cases she investigated.  In one, she had to consult three experts before one of them could figure out a very straightforward issue, which involved how blood spatter could go forward if the person was sitting in the driver's seat with the shotgun in his mouth (pointing to the back of his head).  Now if you question all the evidence (saying it is all faked), then you are beyond conspiracy theories, IMO, and you may have violated the rules of this forum.  But as to camping without using the heat source, as others pointed out, this is something that campers/hikers/climbers have done in cold weather, and the Russian troops, more than a dozen years earlier, had dug out "dens" to survive the night under similar conditions (with no tent at all), so your belief that nobody would pitch a tent there with no heat is just something you would like to believe, because it allows you to claim that everything is faked (and I'm now beginning to suspect you may just be writing up these posts because you get some sort of enjoyment by exasperating other people).  To me, the Chivrauy incident, more than a dozen years later, is more puzzling, in terms of bad decision-making.

[tenne]

this is going to come as a complete shock to you, but you don't have to read what I post AND you don't have to comment. If my thinking bothers you ignore it. If I am violating the rules of the forum to question the evidence, then kick me off. I really don't care.

A dozen years ago isn't 60 years and the equipment used a dozen years ago is hardly comparable to what was available 60 years ago. 

I don't think they were ever there, you do. I had no idea I was supposed to bow to your superior ? whatever you think you have and agree with what ever you say. I guess I missed it in the forum rules that  "everyone has to agree with Investigator" my bad.

I personally thought the idea of a forum was to discuss any aspect of it, but I was obviously wrong. It is obviously to toe the party line and I wont' do that.

Bye

[Investigator]

this is going to come as a complete shock to you, but you don't have to read what I post AND you don't have to comment. If my thinking bothers you ignore it. If I am violating the rules of the forum to question the evidence, then kick me off. I really don't care.

A dozen years ago isn't 60 years and the equipment used a dozen years ago is hardly comparable to what was available 60 years ago. 

I don't think they were ever there, you do. I had no idea I was supposed to bow to your superior ? whatever you think you have and agree with what ever you say. I guess I missed it in the forum rules that  "everyone has to agree with Investigator" my bad.

I personally thought the idea of a forum was to discuss any aspect of it, but I was obviously wrong. It is obviously to toe the party line and I wont' do that.

Bye

And my "line" is the "party line?"  I don't see any mystery at all, let alone the vast conspiracy that you do, but at your level of reasoning, we can also say that it must have been done by alien beings, because that is also possible and doesn't fit the evidence, which is what you are claiming.  You want to tell us that you believe a certain thing happened, which is certainly not impossible, but is contradicted by the evidence we have.  You also have no evidence that it was faked or deliberately mishandled by the investigating authorities.  Moreover, these kinds of incidents are not even uncommon!

[Nigel Evans]

Did you explain that they seem to have dug down one metre and probably created a snow cave (flashlight on 10cm of firn snow) which could raise the temperature from -40C to 0C?

Firn snow takes around a year to form. This area of the Urals is warm in the summer and all snow melts.

Also 10cm of any kind of snow is not sufficient to provide much insulation and moreover if you raise the temperature to 0C somehow you will have a "drip problem" and soon wet blankets and clothing.

The firn snow observation is from the case files that's what the first people at the tent found. That's how they described it. They damaged the tent chipping through it with an ice axe. One of the questions to be answered is how do you create firn snow in three weeks? My answer is by heat.
It was 10cm after this process not before.


Yes the drip problem would have been an issue, but i don't think comfort was their main concern.

[tenne]

I wonder if the down draft from the helicopters could compact that much snow.

[Nigel Evans]

I wonder if the down draft from the helicopters could compact that much snow.

The Soviet helicopters typically used turbo prop engines which is a kind of jet engine, so would be a lot of exhaust heat. Are you aware of the hot spot?

[Investigator]

Did you explain that they seem to have dug down one metre and probably created a snow cave (flashlight on 10cm of firn snow) which could raise the temperature from -40C to 0C?

Firn snow takes around a year to form. This area of the Urals is warm in the summer and all snow melts.

Also 10cm of any kind of snow is not sufficient to provide much insulation and moreover if you raise the temperature to 0C somehow you will have a "drip problem" and soon wet blankets and clothing.

The firn snow observation is from the case files that's what the first people at the tent found. That's how they described it. They damaged the tent chipping through it with an ice axe. One of the questions to be answered is how do you create firn snow in three weeks? My answer is by heat.
It was 10cm after this process not before.


Yes the drip problem would have been an issue, but i don't think comfort was their main concern.

My guess is that, assuming there was snowfall during that period, what happens is the snow warms up during the day and then there is strong directional wind at night, when the temperatures are considerably colder.  I remember when I was a kid and played in snow, that there were different qualities to the snow.  Sometimes it was hard on top, if you tapped it with your fingers, but if you walked on it, it would easily collapse and what was underneath was soft.  Other times it was wet and slushy, etc., but the next day it could be like a sheet of ice, and so forth.

[Nigel Evans]

Did you explain that they seem to have dug down one metre and probably created a snow cave (flashlight on 10cm of firn snow) which could raise the temperature from -40C to 0C?

Firn snow takes around a year to form. This area of the Urals is warm in the summer and all snow melts.

Also 10cm of any kind of snow is not sufficient to provide much insulation and moreover if you raise the temperature to 0C somehow you will have a "drip problem" and soon wet blankets and clothing.

The firn snow observation is from the case files that's what the first people at the tent found. That's how they described it. They damaged the tent chipping through it with an ice axe. One of the questions to be answered is how do you create firn snow in three weeks? My answer is by heat.
It was 10cm after this process not before.


Yes the drip problem would have been an issue, but i don't think comfort was their main concern.

My guess is that, assuming there was snowfall during that period, what happens is the snow warms up during the day and then there is strong directional wind at night, when the temperatures are considerably colder.  I remember when I was a kid and played in snow, that there were different qualities to the snow.  Sometimes it was hard on top, if you tapped it with your fingers, but if you walked on it, it would easily collapse and what was underneath was soft.  Other times it was wet and slushy, etc., but the next day it could be like a sheet of ice, and so forth.

The rescuers talk about the snow around the tent being so hard and bumpy (wind carved wet snow?) that they had to dismount from their skis and walk to the tent. Imo it all points at unusual warming, the tent was on the north east slope so not ideal for the (weak) sun.

[Investigator]

Did you explain that they seem to have dug down one metre and probably created a snow cave (flashlight on 10cm of firn snow) which could raise the temperature from -40C to 0C?

Firn snow takes around a year to form. This area of the Urals is warm in the summer and all snow melts.

Also 10cm of any kind of snow is not sufficient to provide much insulation and moreover if you raise the temperature to 0C somehow you will have a "drip problem" and soon wet blankets and clothing.

The firn snow observation is from the case files that's what the first people at the tent found. That's how they described it. They damaged the tent chipping through it with an ice axe. One of the questions to be answered is how do you create firn snow in three weeks? My answer is by heat.
It was 10cm after this process not before.


Yes the drip problem would have been an issue, but i don't think comfort was their main concern.

My guess is that, assuming there was snowfall during that period, what happens is the snow warms up during the day and then there is strong directional wind at night, when the temperatures are considerably colder.  I remember when I was a kid and played in snow, that there were different qualities to the snow.  Sometimes it was hard on top, if you tapped it with your fingers, but if you walked on it, it would easily collapse and what was underneath was soft.  Other times it was wet and slushy, etc., but the next day it could be like a sheet of ice, and so forth.

The rescuers talk about the snow around the tent being so hard and bumpy (wind carved wet snow?) that they had to dismount from their skis and walk to the tent. Imo it all points at unusual warming, the tent was on the north east slope so not ideal for the (weak) sun.

Also, let's not forget they apparently secured their tent very well by piling a certain amount of snow on top!

[Nigel Evans]

Did you explain that they seem to have dug down one metre and probably created a snow cave (flashlight on 10cm of firn snow) which could raise the temperature from -40C to 0C?

Firn snow takes around a year to form. This area of the Urals is warm in the summer and all snow melts.

Also 10cm of any kind of snow is not sufficient to provide much insulation and moreover if you raise the temperature to 0C somehow you will have a "drip problem" and soon wet blankets and clothing.

The firn snow observation is from the case files that's what the first people at the tent found. That's how they described it. They damaged the tent chipping through it with an ice axe. One of the questions to be answered is how do you create firn snow in three weeks? My answer is by heat.
It was 10cm after this process not before.


Yes the drip problem would have been an issue, but i don't think comfort was their main concern.

My guess is that, assuming there was snowfall during that period, what happens is the snow warms up during the day and then there is strong directional wind at night, when the temperatures are considerably colder.  I remember when I was a kid and played in snow, that there were different qualities to the snow.  Sometimes it was hard on top, if you tapped it with your fingers, but if you walked on it, it would easily collapse and what was underneath was soft.  Other times it was wet and slushy, etc., but the next day it could be like a sheet of ice, and so forth.

The rescuers talk about the snow around the tent being so hard and bumpy (wind carved wet snow?) that they had to dismount from their skis and walk to the tent. Imo it all points at unusual warming, the tent was on the north east slope so not ideal for the (weak) sun.

Also, let's not forget they apparently secured their tent very well by piling a certain amount of snow on top!

Sorry i don't see a connection with the area experiencing unusual warming?

[tenne]

I wonder if the down draft from the helicopters could compact that much snow.

The Soviet helicopters typically used turbo prop engines which is a kind of jet engine, so would be a lot of exhaust heat. Are you aware of the hot spot?

No I am not but when I get back to work I will ask them. I work at the airport and the helicopter mechanic has his office next to mine. I will get his input on Monday.  Like the trapper, he knows way more than me

if you have any questions you would like to ask an experienced helicopter mechanic whose helicopters work in the canadian rockies and do a lot of rescue missions, just let me know and I will ask him. 

[Nigel Evans]

I wonder if the down draft from the helicopters could compact that much snow.

The Soviet helicopters typically used turbo prop engines which is a kind of jet engine, so would be a lot of exhaust heat. Are you aware of the hot spot?

No I am not but when I get back to work I will ask them. I work at the airport and the helicopter mechanic has his office next to mine. I will get his input on Monday.  Like the trapper, he knows way more than me

if you have any questions you would like to ask an experienced helicopter mechanic whose helicopters work in the canadian rockies and do a lot of rescue missions, just let me know and I will ask him.

hot spot refers to an area close to the tent that appears in the photos to have melted. N.b. it's not referred to in the case files but it comes up when unusual warming of the tent area is discussed.

[KFinn]

I wonder if the down draft from the helicopters could compact that much snow.

The Soviet helicopters typically used turbo prop engines which is a kind of jet engine, so would be a lot of exhaust heat. Are you aware of the hot spot?

No I am not but when I get back to work I will ask them. I work at the airport and the helicopter mechanic has his office next to mine. I will get his input on Monday.  Like the trapper, he knows way more than me

if you have any questions you would like to ask an experienced helicopter mechanic whose helicopters work in the canadian rockies and do a lot of rescue missions, just let me know and I will ask him.

This line of the theory should be easy for you to prove.  Where did the helicopter come from?  There will be a paper trail and civilian workers aware of it being used that night, because it would need fuel and radio contact (I assume you mean the night of February 1-2 when Atmanaki's hiking group saw a flare type light near Otorten, since the only other light in the sky in February was the 17, and was determined to be a rocket.  Those were the only two nights of lights until March, so this helicopter dropping off their bodies and camp would have to have been the night of the 1-2.)  There are only a few helicopters out in that region during this time so it should be easy for you to narrow it down to where it came from. 

[Nigel Evans]

I wonder if the down draft from the helicopters could compact that much snow.

The Soviet helicopters typically used turbo prop engines which is a kind of jet engine, so would be a lot of exhaust heat. Are you aware of the hot spot?

No I am not but when I get back to work I will ask them. I work at the airport and the helicopter mechanic has his office next to mine. I will get his input on Monday.  Like the trapper, he knows way more than me

if you have any questions you would like to ask an experienced helicopter mechanic whose helicopters work in the canadian rockies and do a lot of rescue missions, just let me know and I will ask him.

This line of the theory should be easy for you to prove.  Where did the helicopter come from?  There will be a paper trail and civilian workers aware of it being used that night, because it would need fuel and radio contact (I assume you mean the night of February 1-2 when Atmanaki's hiking group saw a flare type light near Otorten, since the only other light in the sky in February was the 17, and was determined to be a rocket.  Those were the only two nights of lights until March, so this helicopter dropping off their bodies and camp would have to have been the night of the 1-2.)  There are only a few helicopters out in that region during this time so it should be easy for you to narrow it down to where it came from.

The Soviet Union had one of the largest militaries in the world, perhaps the largest? Which means lots of helicopters? The region was remote to vehicles (no roads) but no effort for a helicopter based in the Sverdlovsk area.


As for records, when the case was classified all original materials were confiscated so they will exist somewhere, probably with helicopter records should they exist! 

[KFinn]

I wonder if the down draft from the helicopters could compact that much snow.

The Soviet helicopters typically used turbo prop engines which is a kind of jet engine, so would be a lot of exhaust heat. Are you aware of the hot spot?

No I am not but when I get back to work I will ask them. I work at the airport and the helicopter mechanic has his office next to mine. I will get his input on Monday.  Like the trapper, he knows way more than me

if you have any questions you would like to ask an experienced helicopter mechanic whose helicopters work in the canadian rockies and do a lot of rescue missions, just let me know and I will ask him.

This line of the theory should be easy for you to prove.  Where did the helicopter come from?  There will be a paper trail and civilian workers aware of it being used that night, because it would need fuel and radio contact (I assume you mean the night of February 1-2 when Atmanaki's hiking group saw a flare type light near Otorten, since the only other light in the sky in February was the 17, and was determined to be a rocket.  Those were the only two nights of lights until March, so this helicopter dropping off their bodies and camp would have to have been the night of the 1-2.)  There are only a few helicopters out in that region during this time so it should be easy for you to narrow it down to where it came from.

The Soviet Union had one of the largest militaries in the world, perhaps the largest? Which means lots of helicopters? The region was remote to vehicles (no roads) but no effort for a helicopter based in the Sverdlovsk area.


As for records, when the case was classified all original materials were confiscated so they will exist somewhere, probably with helicopter records should they exist! 

They did have a large military.  And one of Kruschev's pushes was largely reducing it in order to put more money into military technology (ie rockets.)  In 1959, while the relationship was not adversarial, Kruschev was quite upfront about reducing the power of the military (something he'd been working on since 1957, actually.)  However, we have records of all of the military and civilian aircraft involved in the search, so we know what was available in the area.  We have interviews with pilots and with the people who worked at the airfields, etc.  It should be relatively easy to either show that there was a helicopter missing the night of the incident, or that records for that night are missing (similar to the missing radiograms from late Feb when a pilot claims too have seen the tent before its discovery.)