Further Discussion of Camping on the Ridge

[KFinn]

It was brought up in the last week or so whether any of us would choose to camp on the ridge where the tent was found.  I've gone back and forth on this myself but I let it digest for a bit.

How many parties have actually set up camp there in *that* spot in winter?  (I know that there is debate on the precise coordinates but we have a good idea of the spot.)  According to WAB when discussing the Swedish expedition a couple of years ago, only three have camped there; the Dyatlov group, the Swedish expedition and WAB's group.  Everyone else camps off the ridge or down from the ridge, from my understanding.  I think there are some strong implications in that.  If over the course of 60+ years, only three groups have done it, is that perhaps an indication that it is not a good spot to pitch a tent? 

[ash73]

People might see it as a bit disrespectful to camp in the same place, other than to study what happened. Not to mention dangerous!

What do we know about their planned route after the fateful night? How many days and nights were they planning to stay above the tree line?

[tenne]

It was brought up in the last week or so whether any of us would choose to camp on the ridge where the tent was found.  I've gone back and forth on this myself but I let it digest for a bit.

How many parties have actually set up camp there in *that* spot in winter?  (I know that there is debate on the precise coordinates but we have a good idea of the spot.)  According to WAB when discussing the Swedish expedition a couple of years ago, only three have camped there; the Dyatlov group, the Swedish expedition and WAB's group.  Everyone else camps off the ridge or down from the ridge, from my understanding.  I think there are some strong implications in that.  If over the course of 60+ years, only three groups have done it, is that perhaps an indication that it is not a good spot to pitch a tent?

The only reason I can see to camp there is to recreate the camping experience the 9 had. with trees, cover, firewood 1 km away, it makes zero sense to camp there

[KFinn]

People might see it as a bit disrespectful to camp in the same place, other than to study what happened. Not to mention dangerous!

What do we know about their planned route after the fateful night? How many days and nights were they planning to stay above the tree line?

I can see there being aversion for some cultures or belief systems or even some people so as not to disrespect the dead or to disturb the dead, being a factor for some.  That is a very complex topic for a lot of people.  Even here in the states, while we have a *ton* of weird people who make pilgrimages to the sites of various tragedies, for some people it is still considered highly disrespectful or at the very least, a high "squig" factor to sleep in such places.  For others, they feel it s a *sign* of respect to do so, to try and feel some kinship to the lost.  And then there are just the weird folks who get a kick out of feeling like they've placed themselves into danger by being near to something horrific (even if a century after the fact...)

But, the most important part for me is that yes, it is dangerous there.  And if over the course  60+ years, only a few experienced souls have camped there, one third of whom perished, it makes me wonder what that might indicate on several key theories.  Did they actually camp there?  Why would they camp there? 

As to their route after 1079, I can only go by the basic route outline that Igor had.  According to that, they were either in the process of or had considered themselves to be "pass in the upper river of the Lozva," which was originally planned for day nine (of course, having a ride to 2nd Northern changed some of their plans as it gave them more time but then, they were slowed by the deeper snow in the woods so there is debate as to whether they were behind schedule, on schedule or ahead of schedule.  It should also be noted that day 6 was the usual day to stop and rest for a day.) So looking at the route plan on this page, the next day was planned to head for Otorten, which would have been at least twenty km +whatever they didn't achieve by not making it into the upper river area of the Lozva (I believe there is a lake there that is the source of the Lozva but don't quote me on that.)

https://dyatlovpass.com/case-files-199-208?rbid=17743

[ash73]

Thanks for that, there must be a route plotted on a map somewhere, Wilkins showed some of it on his map but unfortunately it doesn't show the whole route.

I'm just pondering how much wood they needed for the stove while above the tree line. It would be several nights worth, and they wouldn't want to lose altitude to collect more wood... so it got me wondering if they already had more wood with them, and took it down the slope to the cedar to make the fire. That could explain why they didn't take the saw.

Did they store wood outside the tent? That's where one log was found, iirc? If so, they could still grab it even if they couldn't retrieve clothes from the tent (due to fumes).

[KFinn]

Thanks for that, there must be a route plotted on a map somewhere, Wilkins showed some of it on his map but unfortunately it doesn't show the whole route.

I'm just pondering how much wood they needed for the stove while above the tree line. It would be several nights worth, and they wouldn't want to lose altitude to collect more wood... so it got me wondering if they already had more wood with them, and took it down the slope to the cedar to make the fire. That could explain why they didn't take the saw.

Did they store wood outside the tent? That's where one log was found, iirc? If so, they could still grab it even if they couldn't retrieve clothes from the tent (due to fumes).

You know, that's a very interesting idea, them taking wood with them to the cedar.  It doesn't explain not taking shoes and such but it could very much explain other things!!

[sarapuk]

It was brought up in the last week or so whether any of us would choose to camp on the ridge where the tent was found.  I've gone back and forth on this myself but I let it digest for a bit.

How many parties have actually set up camp there in *that* spot in winter?  (I know that there is debate on the precise coordinates but we have a good idea of the spot.)  According to WAB when discussing the Swedish expedition a couple of years ago, only three have camped there; the Dyatlov group, the Swedish expedition and WAB's group.  Everyone else camps off the ridge or down from the ridge, from my understanding.  I think there are some strong implications in that.  If over the course of 60+ years, only three groups have done it, is that perhaps an indication that it is not a good spot to pitch a tent?

Well speaking from the common sense angle I would say that no one should camp on such an exposed Mountain side in Winter in Siberia where winds can help temperatures to drop to minus 40c.