Dyatlov Pass Incident (1959)
- Thread starter Philo_T
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2004
- Messages
- 29,622
- Location
- Out of Bounds
RE: Philomath's list of questions ...
I've never seen any detailed account of the search party's search activities prior to locating the tent site. As such, it's anybody's guess how much (if any) of the Dyatlov party's tracks were still visible on the surface over 3 weeks later.
It's important to remember more than 3 weeks had passed, and it had been snowing with significant winds all the while. The party's ascent route from the south was more or less in the lee of the mountain's flank. The tent site is on the side of the main peak just past the 'saddle' of the pass, and was exposed to the prevailing winds from the west. The valley into which the party fled was less exposed to the wind - particularly once you get to the tree line.
My point is that the only set of tracks readily discoverable (traced circa 500m down-slope from the tent) were the only tracks relatively exposed to the winds for over 3 weeks. It's not a matter of tracks appearing or disappearing; it's simply a matter of tracks being covered / uncovered by subsequent weather.
Once the searchers found the trail they could follow it with little excavation necessary. The searchers lost the trail (or simply quit working to uncover it) about 500m down-slope.
If you examine the final photos (of the party digging a place for the tent) versus the search party photos it seems pretty clear the snow pack at the tent site had diminished during those two weeks.
No one knows the state of the tent at the time the cuts were made. The cuts were not uniformly 'clean'. Their straightest edges are the vertical sides - which could have been the result of simply tearing the fabric along its weave. The tops and bottoms of the two main holes were quite ragged. Two smaller cuts (toward the entrance end of the tent; the end still standing 2 weeks later) are ragged arcs.
The search party included volunteers (e.g., students), and the record mentions some of the searchers had already dug into the tent and rummaged around by the time the senior searchers arrived on the scene. There is no photographic record of the tent site as originally found. Drawings included in the original reports seem to indicate the peak of the still-erect entrance end of the tent was the only part protruding from the snow.
Some accounts suggest one or more of the cuts may have been made by the two student volunteers who first found the tent.
The only basis for the claim the cuts were made from inside the tent was that threads along the edges of the holes were bent outward. The reports indicate this conclusion was reached after examining more than one of the holes, but nowhere does it claim the same thread orientation was evident on all edges of all holes.
The chronology of events has always been pure speculation. One point that's always bugged me is the assumption there was one crisis causing everyone to leave the tent at one time, and that the folks' diverse movements all followed from that single descent event.
A related issue is the assumption that the motivating crisis and their fatal response(s) had to have occurred during the first night at that site. The diary indicates they set up the tent, had a meal, and presumably settled in for the night. It was snowing with substantial winds. What if they didn't leave the tent until the following day? What if they awoke to find themselves snowbound, sent a party to get wood from the valley below (who never returned ...), and at some point desperately descended themselves - perhaps in a rush caused by another event?
Once you step back from the relatively simplistic traditional assumptions there's room for all sorts of variant event chronologies.
The original autopsies allegedly claimed all died circa 6 - 8 hours after the last meal. This has always been assumed to mean the last meal noted in the diary - i.e., in the evening after setting up camp on the pass.
I've never seen a detailed inventory of the footwear found at the tent versus found with the bodies.
Slobodin was found with a single valenki (traditional Russian felt boot).
Zolotarev was found wearing sewn leather (maybe leather / felt) boots (burki).
I've never been clear what footwear was found on the relatively well-clothed Thibeaux-Brignolle.
All the others were found wearing only socks, ranging from one pair (Dyatlov) to 3 or 4 pairs (depending on the documentation).
At least one person (Dubinina) had wrapped a piece of non-stocking cloth around one of her feet.
That's unknown. All that's known is that it was snowing when they arrived. Detailed weather data for that remote area was not recorded as of 1959.
True. This point was cited in the formal reports. The searchers reported that some individual tracks diverged from the main group track, but eventually rejoined it.
The slow and orderly descent could have been caused by deep snow conditions and / or the need to aid one or more of the people (e.g., owing to injuries).
It's also worth pointing out that the only basis for assuming the party descended all at once is that their tracks comprised a single path. The same effect would have been obtained with multiple descents with later evacuees simply following the trail of the earlier ones.
The only clue cited for the sequence of travel is that one set of footprints overlays others and indicates a longer stride. This set was assumed to have been made by the tallest member of the party - Thibeaux-Brignolle.
Yes - and this is one of the most striking oddities about the incident. The den at which some of the bodies were found would have required patient work to create. This den construction seems misaligned with (what's always been construed as ...) the relatively desperate activities at the tree site where a fire had been started. No one has ever had a good explanation for why there were two focal sites down in the valley (the tree / fire site; the den site), about (as I recall ...) 75m apart. This is one of the reasons I believe the 'single crisis / single descent' assumptions may well be suspect.
I've never seen any detailed account of the search party's search activities prior to locating the tent site. As such, it's anybody's guess how much (if any) of the Dyatlov party's tracks were still visible on the surface over 3 weeks later.
It's important to remember more than 3 weeks had passed, and it had been snowing with significant winds all the while. The party's ascent route from the south was more or less in the lee of the mountain's flank. The tent site is on the side of the main peak just past the 'saddle' of the pass, and was exposed to the prevailing winds from the west. The valley into which the party fled was less exposed to the wind - particularly once you get to the tree line.
My point is that the only set of tracks readily discoverable (traced circa 500m down-slope from the tent) were the only tracks relatively exposed to the winds for over 3 weeks. It's not a matter of tracks appearing or disappearing; it's simply a matter of tracks being covered / uncovered by subsequent weather.
Once the searchers found the trail they could follow it with little excavation necessary. The searchers lost the trail (or simply quit working to uncover it) about 500m down-slope.
If you examine the final photos (of the party digging a place for the tent) versus the search party photos it seems pretty clear the snow pack at the tent site had diminished during those two weeks.
No one knows the state of the tent at the time the cuts were made. The cuts were not uniformly 'clean'. Their straightest edges are the vertical sides - which could have been the result of simply tearing the fabric along its weave. The tops and bottoms of the two main holes were quite ragged. Two smaller cuts (toward the entrance end of the tent; the end still standing 2 weeks later) are ragged arcs.
The search party included volunteers (e.g., students), and the record mentions some of the searchers had already dug into the tent and rummaged around by the time the senior searchers arrived on the scene. There is no photographic record of the tent site as originally found. Drawings included in the original reports seem to indicate the peak of the still-erect entrance end of the tent was the only part protruding from the snow.
Some accounts suggest one or more of the cuts may have been made by the two student volunteers who first found the tent.
The only basis for the claim the cuts were made from inside the tent was that threads along the edges of the holes were bent outward. The reports indicate this conclusion was reached after examining more than one of the holes, but nowhere does it claim the same thread orientation was evident on all edges of all holes.
The chronology of events has always been pure speculation. One point that's always bugged me is the assumption there was one crisis causing everyone to leave the tent at one time, and that the folks' diverse movements all followed from that single descent event.
A related issue is the assumption that the motivating crisis and their fatal response(s) had to have occurred during the first night at that site. The diary indicates they set up the tent, had a meal, and presumably settled in for the night. It was snowing with substantial winds. What if they didn't leave the tent until the following day? What if they awoke to find themselves snowbound, sent a party to get wood from the valley below (who never returned ...), and at some point desperately descended themselves - perhaps in a rush caused by another event?
Once you step back from the relatively simplistic traditional assumptions there's room for all sorts of variant event chronologies.
The original autopsies allegedly claimed all died circa 6 - 8 hours after the last meal. This has always been assumed to mean the last meal noted in the diary - i.e., in the evening after setting up camp on the pass.
I've never seen a detailed inventory of the footwear found at the tent versus found with the bodies.
Slobodin was found with a single valenki (traditional Russian felt boot).
Zolotarev was found wearing sewn leather (maybe leather / felt) boots (burki).
I've never been clear what footwear was found on the relatively well-clothed Thibeaux-Brignolle.
All the others were found wearing only socks, ranging from one pair (Dyatlov) to 3 or 4 pairs (depending on the documentation).
At least one person (Dubinina) had wrapped a piece of non-stocking cloth around one of her feet.
That's unknown. All that's known is that it was snowing when they arrived. Detailed weather data for that remote area was not recorded as of 1959.
True. This point was cited in the formal reports. The searchers reported that some individual tracks diverged from the main group track, but eventually rejoined it.
The slow and orderly descent could have been caused by deep snow conditions and / or the need to aid one or more of the people (e.g., owing to injuries).
It's also worth pointing out that the only basis for assuming the party descended all at once is that their tracks comprised a single path. The same effect would have been obtained with multiple descents with later evacuees simply following the trail of the earlier ones.
The only clue cited for the sequence of travel is that one set of footprints overlays others and indicates a longer stride. This set was assumed to have been made by the tallest member of the party - Thibeaux-Brignolle.
Yes - and this is one of the most striking oddities about the incident. The den at which some of the bodies were found would have required patient work to create. This den construction seems misaligned with (what's always been construed as ...) the relatively desperate activities at the tree site where a fire had been started. No one has ever had a good explanation for why there were two focal sites down in the valley (the tree / fire site; the den site), about (as I recall ...) 75m apart. This is one of the reasons I believe the 'single crisis / single descent' assumptions may well be suspect.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2004
- Messages
- 29,622
- Location
- Out of Bounds
Russian time zones have been subject to a lot of variations and changes.
According to the table at:
http://www.statoids.com/tru.html
... as of 1959 Moscow Time was UTC+2, and the time zone in which the Dyatlov party was (Asia/Yekaterinburg zone) was UTC+4.
The fatal night's moonrise would have been @ 0315 hours Moscow Time.
This would translate into 0515 hours in the scene's time zone.
Assuming they were 'tuned' to the local time zone, and the evening meal on the 1st was in fact the final meal, they were all dead or near dead when the moon rose that night.
Whether or not the sky had cleared so they could even see the moon is another matter entirely.
According to the table at:
http://www.statoids.com/tru.html
... as of 1959 Moscow Time was UTC+2, and the time zone in which the Dyatlov party was (Asia/Yekaterinburg zone) was UTC+4.
The fatal night's moonrise would have been @ 0315 hours Moscow Time.
This would translate into 0515 hours in the scene's time zone.
Assuming they were 'tuned' to the local time zone, and the evening meal on the 1st was in fact the final meal, they were all dead or near dead when the moon rose that night.
Whether or not the sky had cleared so they could even see the moon is another matter entirely.
Just finished reading Donnie Eichar book Dead Mountain: The Untold True Story of the Dyatlov Pass Incident...
A bit disappointing as although he apparently collected a lot of (new) doocuments, the books not only does not add much to already known 'facts', but also overlooks amy potentially important details.
The infrasound theory seems a bit simplistic, although would not ne complicated to test whether similar infrasounds could be produced by the mountain summit by placing sound sensor in the place wher ethe tent was...
A bit disappointing as although he apparently collected a lot of (new) doocuments, the books not only does not add much to already known 'facts', but also overlooks amy potentially important details.
The infrasound theory seems a bit simplistic, although would not ne complicated to test whether similar infrasounds could be produced by the mountain summit by placing sound sensor in the place wher ethe tent was...
feinman
Account Retired
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2013
- Messages
- 2,761
philomath said:
But would that sound be so bad that they wouldn't take more gear? And continue to risk freezing to death in nasty ways? If it was such a constant sound, and endured at the time, wouldn't it be easy to detect it again, now?
Mythopoeika
I am a meat popsicle
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2001
- Messages
- 51,712
- Location
- Inside a starship, watching puny humans from afar
I find myself thinking that there must be a reason why it's called Dead Mountain...something bad must have happened there before the Dyatlov Pass Incident.
Are there any other historical reports, I wonder?
Are there any other historical reports, I wonder?
feinman
Account Retired
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2013
- Messages
- 2,761
Mythopoeika said:
'Kholat Syakhl heads the list of most dangerous unexplained death zones in Russia: 27 people have lost their lives there over the last 100 years. In addition to the Dyatlov Pass incident in 1959, another nine fatalities occurred in 1960, in three separate air crashes involving pilots and geologists. In 1961, the bodies of nine tourists from Leningrad were discovered.
More recently, a helicopter crashed on the approach to Mount Kholat Syakhl, with nine people aboard — although, amazingly, no one was killed. The number nine holds a morbid significance for this location'
<Throws out Kholat guidebook and picks up Fodor's Las Vegas> :shock:
Mythopoeika said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kholat_Syakhl
"Name of this mountain simply means lack of game for Mansi hunters, not "Mountain of the Dead" as some suggest due to popular misconception and related events. Mansi word "Kholat" meaning "dead" or "meager" is a relatively common name on their territory and is part of at least 3 other topographic objects."
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2004
- Messages
- 29,622
- Location
- Out of Bounds
philomath said:
I had the same impressions of the Eichar book. Much of the supposedly 'new' stuff he cites isn't new - it's just been buried in Russian language documentation that most folks don't labor to dig out.
However ... He does claim to have interviewed some of the surviving folks who were involved. The book weaves things together in a nice storytelling motif, but it's unclear how much of the text reflects facts and how much is 'gloss' for the sake of storytelling.
One thing did pop out at me ... Eichar claims twice (pp. 19 and 77) that the two volunteers who initially located the tent tore into it with an ice axe. This is the most specific claim I've seen to indicate at least some of the tent damage was caused by the searchers themselves. Previously I'd only seen vague claims in the Russian language report that the scene had been disturbed by volunteers before the more senior / experienced search party members came to the site.
On the other hand, it is at one of these junctures (p. 77) where Eichar contradicts the earlier documentation. He claims the two volunteers who first located the tent found a flashlight left in the 'on' position at the tent site. The original reports mention two flashlights having been found - one at the tent, and the other down in the valley to which the party fled. It was the flashlight found down in the valley that was in the 'on' position with dead batteries. The original report claimed the flashlight found at the tent was in the 'off' position, and its batteries were not dead.
On p. 156 Eichar notes a tailor examined other cuts on the tent (supposedly not made by the searchers) and states his examination supported a conclusion the cutting had been done from outside the tent. This contradicts the original report's conclusion (supported by illustrative diagrams) that the incisions had been made from inside the tent.
All I'm saying is that Eichar's account seems to add more confusion than it dispels.
feinman
Account Retired
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2013
- Messages
- 2,761
Wow! My hat is off to you on your research. Just to get a bit Fortean:
http://inexplicata.blogspot.com/2014/01 ... rvive.html
They died right at the very beginning of the waxing New Moon:
http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/phase/phases1901.html :shock:
http://inexplicata.blogspot.com/2014/01 ... rvive.html
They died right at the very beginning of the waxing New Moon:
http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/phase/phases1901.html :shock:
feinman
Account Retired
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2013
- Messages
- 2,761
The autopsy reports previously seen at the page at the Ermak travel site have mysteriously "been suspended" thank god for the Wayback Machine:
http://web.archive.org/web/201312041016 ... topsy.html
Those seem freaking bizarre, IMHO. Burns? And Dubinina's eyes and tongue were the only ones missing out of the group? Why? Are scavengers so picky?
http://web.archive.org/web/201312041016 ... topsy.html
Those seem freaking bizarre, IMHO. Burns? And Dubinina's eyes and tongue were the only ones missing out of the group? Why? Are scavengers so picky?
feinman
Account Retired
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2013
- Messages
- 2,761
Orbs and mutilations:
http://www.theweeklyconstitutional.com/ ... d-the-apfu
http://orangeorb.blogspot.com/2009/11/c ... -luis.html
'One calf had its tongue removed' :shock:
Yepsters, I saw 'em once too. And I had a horrible sense of being observed... No other cars were around, and it was eerily silent.
This pic from the newly published "Book of Miracles" might as well be a portrait of the same kind of things that might have killed those folks:
http://tinyurl.com/mr53twm
http://www.theweeklyconstitutional.com/ ... d-the-apfu
http://orangeorb.blogspot.com/2009/11/c ... -luis.html
'One calf had its tongue removed' :shock:
Yepsters, I saw 'em once too. And I had a horrible sense of being observed... No other cars were around, and it was eerily silent.
This pic from the newly published "Book of Miracles" might as well be a portrait of the same kind of things that might have killed those folks:
http://tinyurl.com/mr53twm
feinman
Account Retired
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2013
- Messages
- 2,761
'In 1990, the chief investigator, Lev Ivanov, said in an interview that he had been ordered by senior regional officials to close the case and classify the findings as secret. He said the officials had been worried by reports from multiple eyewitnesses, including the weather service and the military, that “bright flying spheres” had been spotted in the area in February and March 1959.
“I suspected at the time and am almost sure now that these bright flying spheres had a direct connection to the group’s death,” Ivanov told Leninsky Put, a small Kazakh newspaper. He retired in Kazakhstan and has since died.'
“I suspected at the time and am almost sure now that these bright flying spheres had a direct connection to the group’s death,” Ivanov told Leninsky Put, a small Kazakh newspaper. He retired in Kazakhstan and has since died.'
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2004
- Messages
- 29,622
- Location
- Out of Bounds
The Ermak version of the autopsy reports includes a description of Thibeaux-Brignolle's clothing (which somehow got omitted from many of the other online sites that otherwise used the same text). It shows that he was in fact wearing a pair of valenki (felt boots).
I was also reminded of a discrepancy regarding the footprints leading down-slope from the tent. The reports claimed the last person to follow the trail was tall and had a long stride, based on the claim his set of footprints overlaid others. This is often taken to mean Thibeaux-Brignolle was the last in line.
However, the autopsy report states Doroshenko (one of the two found under the cedar tree) was the tallest of the group. Doroshenko didn't have any footwear; Thibeaux-Brignolle (along with Zolotarev) was found wearing a pair of boots. If we assume it was Doroshenko who was last off the mountain, it means our only clue to descent sequence indicates the last person was one of the least-dressed ones.
Accounts commonly refer to Thibeaux-Brignolle's / Zolotarev's complete attire as evidence they were outside the tent (or at least not yet preparing to sleep) when something happened that forced the entire group to leave at once. The presence of urine outside the tent is commonly cited as possible evidence they were outside the tent having a final pre-sleep pee break at the point the presumed single-point-crisis occurred.
The attribution of the last person's long stride to Thibeaux-Brignolle suggests the well-dressed descended with the ill-dressed. If Thibeaux-Brignolle was _not_ the rearmost long strider, this opens up the possibility that he and Zolotarev could have departed the tent before the other (ill-dressed) folks came off the mountain.
I was also reminded of a discrepancy regarding the footprints leading down-slope from the tent. The reports claimed the last person to follow the trail was tall and had a long stride, based on the claim his set of footprints overlaid others. This is often taken to mean Thibeaux-Brignolle was the last in line.
However, the autopsy report states Doroshenko (one of the two found under the cedar tree) was the tallest of the group. Doroshenko didn't have any footwear; Thibeaux-Brignolle (along with Zolotarev) was found wearing a pair of boots. If we assume it was Doroshenko who was last off the mountain, it means our only clue to descent sequence indicates the last person was one of the least-dressed ones.
Accounts commonly refer to Thibeaux-Brignolle's / Zolotarev's complete attire as evidence they were outside the tent (or at least not yet preparing to sleep) when something happened that forced the entire group to leave at once. The presence of urine outside the tent is commonly cited as possible evidence they were outside the tent having a final pre-sleep pee break at the point the presumed single-point-crisis occurred.
The attribution of the last person's long stride to Thibeaux-Brignolle suggests the well-dressed descended with the ill-dressed. If Thibeaux-Brignolle was _not_ the rearmost long strider, this opens up the possibility that he and Zolotarev could have departed the tent before the other (ill-dressed) folks came off the mountain.
desire to urinate is usually experienced when bladder contains 150 - 200 ml, but it can be voluntarily overridden until 600–800 ml...many 'tourists' had a bladder fuller than that and Igor had 1 liter...http://web.archive.org/web/201312041016 ... topsy.html
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2004
- Messages
- 29,622
- Location
- Out of Bounds
feinman said:
The invocation of the mystery lights / spheres / orbs is something of a red herring in all this. The lights have been strenuously emphasized among the latter-day (often UFO-associated) writers who dredged up and popularized the Dyatlov incident over the last 2 decades. However, the association of the Dyatlov tragedy with reports of the mystery lights in the sky is based on flimsy allusion.
The following three items are facts:
(1) Members of the search party (weeks after the skiers died) reported seeing mystery lights in the sky at the mountain site.
(2) Members of an entirely unrelated expedition (some sort of geological survey team, if I recall correctly) reported _weeks after the incident occurred_ that they'd been camped a considerable distance to the south (most accounts cite 50 km or more) and had seen mysterious lights in the sky to the north (i.e., in the direction of the fatal site) sometime around the 1st of February. This vague report is almost always translated into a claim that the sighting was definitely on the fatal night and definitely at Mount Kholat Syakhl.
(3) Sightings of mystery lights in the sky in that area had occurred prior to the Dyatlov expedition and continued afterward. However, there's no such report specifically correlated with the party's last night.
It is certainly the case mystery lights had been observed in the area of Mount Kholat Syakhl. It is certainly not the case this longstanding phenomenon has ever been clearly linked to the Dyatlov party's fatal location and timeframe, much less their actual demise.
feinman
Account Retired
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2013
- Messages
- 2,761
Thanks for the clarification! So we have mystery lights associated with that particular area, and a pretty strange incident, but not on the same night. Still surpassingly odd.. As odd as the cattle mutilations, to my mind. Thanks for your research and analysis, some of the best I've read; maybe YOU should write a book, or are you responsible for the feature FT article?
From the official investigation documents
http://web.archive.org/web/201308271114 ... Syakhl.htm
In one of the cameras kept a photo frame (made by the latter), which shows the time of the excavation of snow for tent set up. Given that this shot was taken with a shutter speed of 1/25 second at an aperture of 5.6, with a sensitivity of 65 units of GOST film, as well as taking into account the density of the frame, it can be assumed that the installation tents began about 5:00 pm, the 01/02/1959. A similar picture was taken with another camera. After this time, no record and no snapshot was detected.
http://web.archive.org/web/201308271114 ... Syakhl.htm
In one of the cameras kept a photo frame (made by the latter), which shows the time of the excavation of snow for tent set up. Given that this shot was taken with a shutter speed of 1/25 second at an aperture of 5.6, with a sensitivity of 65 units of GOST film, as well as taking into account the density of the frame, it can be assumed that the installation tents began about 5:00 pm, the 01/02/1959. A similar picture was taken with another camera. After this time, no record and no snapshot was detected.
the last (?) night (?) story seems it can be divided in 2 parts: the 1st with the tourists leaving the campsite being 'irrational' and the 2nd with the tourist fighting to survive and tryng to get back being 'rational'.
Bringing a flashlight with them seems the only ratioanl behavior (unless it was day time!)
Bringing a flashlight with them seems the only ratioanl behavior (unless it was day time!)
One of the unusual and unexpected findings was a skiing pole that with clear cutting marks. Tourists didn't have any extra poles...
from:
http://web.archive.org/web/201308271114 ... Syakhl.htm
also I've read that Yuri Yudin could not recognise a piece of cloth that looked like it had come from a soldier’s coat, a pair of glasses, a 10th pair of extra skis ... anybody able to confirm validity of this?
from:
http://web.archive.org/web/201308271114 ... Syakhl.htm
also I've read that Yuri Yudin could not recognise a piece of cloth that looked like it had come from a soldier’s coat, a pair of glasses, a 10th pair of extra skis ... anybody able to confirm validity of this?