Post by Bill ClarkePost by Anthony MarshPost by Bill ClarkePost by Anthony MarshPost by bigdogPost by Anthony MarshPost by bigdogPost by clavigerLocal investigator studies JFK assassination
https://wcfcourier.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/local-investigator-studies-jfk-assassination/article_11526809-84d6-5f60-9c0f-5c891b3e1202.html
Local investigator studies JFK assassination | Crime and Courts ...
Nov 22, 2013 - Local investigator studies JFK assassination ...
Carcano fired from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository in
1963. ...
He's drawn on his background as a firearms instructor and ballistics expert
and has been to the ...
This is what he said about his attempt to fire the 3 shots with the
Carcano"
???The best I was able to do with it at 50 yards off a bench with no
stress, firing as rapidly as I could to get in the 8 second range, I was
able to get an 11-inch group. That???s at a stationary
target,??? Carrier said. That means plinking shots under ideal
conditions in the 8 seconds Kennedy was under fire resulted in the bullets
hitting as far as 11 inches apart from one another."
That compares favorably with what Oswald did. His two shots which hit the
target weren't much closer than that, even going with the lower entry
wound in the back of the head as determined by the original autopsy team,
and one shot completely missing the target. If we go with the HSCA
placement of the head shot, the two shots on target were about 11 inches
apart. Notice he said his shots were as far as 11 inches apart. That seems
to imply he had other groupings closer than 11 inches apart.
Pure junk. You know nothing about guns. Shooting at a closer distance
does not solve the problem. He missed Walker at 120 feet.
You can hit the bullseye if the distance to your target is exactly the
same as the zeroing in distance on the rifle. Close ot farther away and
you will miss. We've been over this thousands of time, but you refuse to
http://www.the-puzzle-palace.com/Whelan81.jpg
Figure 31 exampl1 A
That is very close to what Oswald's rifle does.
Once more Marsh demonstrates he doesn't bother to read the posts he
responds to.
Can't you even SEE that diagram. A very high trajectory misses the
target at a closer distance.
Come on General; Combat zero. Shoot lower at the close ranges. Not that
Oswald would not know that. He was trained on an M-1 which has a very
FLAT trajectory as the diagram shows.
They been teaching combat zero for a long time Marsh. Most of us learned
it from our old man when we were kids. May I point out that the
difference you are referring to is a couple of inches. A couple of inches
doesn't necessary mean a miss.
Excuse me? A couple of inches is why Oswald's bullet hit the meeing rails
instead of going through the glass and hitting Walker. It is not always
just a couple of inches. It depends on many factors and as Dave Emary
points out it could be SEVERAL inches:
6.5 mm Carcanos were equiped with a wide variety of sights. Early model
M91 series rifles had adjustable sights with a fixed battle zero sight.
Most models of rifles made just before or during WWII had fixed sights.
The exception to this was the M41 model. From a user standpoint the WWII
era Carcano???s sights are the model of effectiveness and simplicity. The
early model M91 version rifles with the fixed battle sight being at 300
meters was probably not the greatest decision but reflected the trend of
that time. With this sight setting the rifles would have a maximum height
of trajectory of approximately 15??? ??? 17??? at a range of 175 to 200
yards, depending on barrel length. I suspect more than one Austrian
soldiers life was spared in WWI because someone shot over his head.
Post by Bill ClarkePost by Anthony MarshPost by Bill Clarkeit is all that critical in this case. I believe from Dave Emary's work
that the round would be about 4.1 inches high at 100 yards. So Marsh,
take a drafting compass and stick the point in your nose. This might hurt
a bit. Now draw a 4 inch circle around your face. Find any place the
bullet struck your face?
As you nuts? You are admitting a shot from the front?
We were talking about a shot from behind.
Okay. Do it to the back of your head. Same results. You don't
necessarily miss your head.
I think you're missing YOUR head.
You assume a perfect shot with no deviance so you think you know where
the point of aim was and that Oswald was a perfect shooter. Ridiculous.
Maggie Drawers.
Even the FBI missed using Oswald's rifle and that was at much closer
distances.
Like 15 yards. Even you would miss at 15 yards.
Mr. EISENBERG - This test was performed at 15 yards, did you say, Mr.
Frazier?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. And this series of shots we fired to determine
actually the speed at which the rifle could be fired, not being overly
familiar with this particular firearm, and also to determine the
accuracy of the weapon under those conditions.
Mr. EISENBERG - And could you give us the names of the three agents who
participated?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. Charles Killion, Cortlandt Cunningham, and myself.
Mr. EISENBERG - And the date?
Mr. FRAZIER - November 27, 1963.
Mr. EISENBERG - How many shots did each agent fire?
Mr. FRAZIER - Killion fired three, Cunningham fired three, and I fired
three.
Mr. EISENBERG - And do you have the times within which each agent fired
the three shots?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. Killion fired his three shots in nine seconds,
and they are shown--the three shots are interlocking, shown on
Commission Exhibit No. 549.
Cunningham fired three shots--I know the approximate number of seconds
was seven.
Cunningham's time was approximately seven seconds.
Mr. EISENBERG - Can you at a later date confirm the exact time?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG - And you will do that by letter to the Commission, or if
you happen to come back by oral testimony?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG - And your time, Mr. Frazier?
Mr. FRAZIER - For this series, was six seconds, for my three shots,
which also were on the target at which Mr. Cunningham fired, which is
Exhibit 548.
Mr. EISENBERG - Could you characterize the dispersion of the shots on
the two targets which you have been showing us, 548 and 549?
Mr. FRAZIER - The bullets landed approximately--in Killion's target, No.
549, approximately 2 1/2 inches high, and 1 inch to the right, in the
area about the size of a dime, interlocking in the paper, all three shots.
On Commission Exhibit 548, Cunningham fired three shots. These shots
were interlocking, or within an eighth of an inch of each other, and
were located approximately 4 inches high and 1 inch to the right of the
aiming point. The three shots which I fired were landed in a
three-quarter inch circle, two of them interlocking with Cunningham's
shots, 4 inches high, and approximately 1 inch to the right of the
aiming point.
Mr. EISENBERG - Can you describe the second series of tests?
Mr. FRAZIER - The second test which was performed was two series of
three shots at 25 yards, instead of 15 yards. I fired both of these
tests, firing them at a cardboard target, in an effort to determine how
fast the weapon could be fired primarily, with secondary purpose accuracy.
We did not attempt- I did not attempt to maintain in that test an
accurate rate of fire.
This is the actual target which I fired.
Mr. EISENBERG - And that target has all six holes in it?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir--two series of three holes, the first three holes
being marked with the No. 1, and the second series being marked No. 2.
Mr. EISENBERG - Mr. Chairman, I would like this introduced as 550.
Mr. McCLOY - That will be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 550, and
received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG - Could you describe for the record the dispersion on the
two series?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. The first series of three shots were
approximately--from 4 to 5 inches high and from 1 to 2 inches to the
right of the aiming point, and landed within a 2-inch circle. These
three shots were fired in 4.8 seconds. The second series of shots
landed--one was about 1 inch high, and the other two about 4 or 5 inches
high, and the maximum spread was 5 inches.
That series was fired in 4.6 seconds.
Mr. EISENBERG - And do you have the date?
Mr. FRAZIER - That also was on the 27th of November.
Mr. EISENBERG - Same date as the first tests?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
How did the FBI agents do at 100 yards?
Mr. EISENBERG - And you performed one more test, I believe?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. We fired additional targets at 100 yards on the
range at Quantico, Va., firing groups of three shots. And 1 have the
four targets we fired here.
Mr. EISENBERG - Mr. Chairman, I would like these admitted as 551, 552,
553, and 554.
Mr. McCLOY - They may be admitted.
(The documents referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 551
through 554, and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG - Who fired these shots, Mr. Frazier?
Mr. FRAZIER - I fired them.
Mr. EISENBERG - Can you characterize the dispersion on each of the four
targets?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
On Commission Exhibit 551 the three shots landed approximately 5 inches
high and within a 3 1/2-inch circle, almost on a line horizontally
across the target. This target and the other targets were fired on March
16, 1964 at Quantico, Va. These three shots were fired in 5.9 seconds.
The second target fired is Commission Exhibit 552, consisting of three
shots fired in 6.2 seconds, which landed in approximately a 4 1/2 to
5-inch circle located 4 inches high and 3 or 4 inches to the right of
the aiming point.
Commission Exhibit No. 553 is the third target fired, consisting of
three shots which landed in a 3-inch circle located about 2 1/2 inches
high and 2 inches to the right of the aiming point.
These three shots were fired in 5.6 seconds.
And Commission Exhibit No. 554, consisting of three shots fired in 6.5
seconds, which landed approximately 5 inches high and 5 inches to the
right of the aiming point, all within a 3 1/2-inch circle.
Mr. McCLOY - The first one is not exactly 5 inches to the right, is it?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir. The center of the circle in which they all landed
would be about 5 inches high and 5 inches to the right.
Mr. EISENBERG - Mr. Frazier, could you tell us why, in your opinion, all
the shots, virtually all the shots, are grouped high and to the right of
the aiming point?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. When we attempted to sight in this rifle at
Quantico, we found that the elevation adjustment in the telescopic sight
was not sufficient to bring the point of impact to the aiming point. In
attempting to adjust and sight-in the rifle, every time we changed the
adjusting screws to move the crosshairs in the telescopic sight in one
direction-it also affected the movement of the impact or the point of
impact in the other direction. That is, if we moved the crosshairs in
the telescope to the left it would also affect the elevation setting of
the telescope. And when we had sighted-in the rifle approximately, we
fired several shots and found that the shots were not all landing in the
same place, but were gradually moving away from the point of impact.
This was apparently due to the construction of the telescope, which
apparently did not stabilize itself--that is, the spring mounting in the
crosshair ring did not stabilize until we had fired five or six shots.
Mr. EISENBERG - Pardon me, Mr. Frazier. Have you prepared a diagram of
the telescopic sight?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG - I wonder whether you could show us that now to help
illustrate the point you are making.
Let me mark that.
This diagram was prepared by you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes; it was.
Mr. EISENBERG - And illustrated.
Mr. FRAZIER - Excuse me. The actual diagram was copied by me from a
textbook, showing a diagrammatic view of how a telescopic crosshair ring
is mounted in a telescope.
Mr. EISENBERG - This is a generalized diagram, rather than a diagram of
the specific scope on Exhibit 139?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes; it is. However, I have checked the scope on Exhibit
139 and found it to be substantially the same as this diagram.
Mr. EISENBERG - Mr. Chairman, may I have this admitted as 555?
Mr. McCLOY - It may be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 555, and
received in evidence.)
Mr. FRAZIER - Commission Exhibit No. 555 is a diagrammatic drawing of
the manner in which the crosshair ring is mounted in Exhibit 139,
showing on the right-hand side of the diagram a circular drawing
indicating the outer part of the tube, with an inner circle with a
crossed line in it representing the crosshairs in the telescope.
There is an elevation-adjusting screw at the top, which pushes the
crosshair ring down against a spring located in the lower left-hand
portion of the circle, or which allows the crosshair ring to come up,
being pushed by the spring on the opposite side of the ring. There is a
windage screw on the right-hand side of the scope tube circle which
adjusts the crosshair ring laterally for windage adjustments.
The diagram at the left side of Commission's Exhibit 555 shows
diagrammatically the blade spring mounted in the telescope tube which
causes the ring to be pressed against the adjusting screws.
We found in this telescopic sight on this rifle that this ring was
shifting in the telescope tube 80 that the gun could not be sighted-in
merely by changing the screws. It was necessary to adjust it, and then
fire several shots to stabilize the crosshair ring by causing this
spring to press tightly against the screws, to the point that we decided
it would not be feasible to completely sight the weapon inasfar as
windage goes, and in addition found that the elevation screw could not
be adjusted sufficiently to bring the point of impact on the targets
down to the sighting point.
And, therefore, we left the rifle as soon as it became stabilized and
fired all of our shots with the point of impact actually high and to the
right.
Mr. EISENBERG - As I understand it, the construction of the scope is
such that after the elevation or windage screw has been moved, the scope
does not--is not--automatically pushed up by the blade spring as it
should be, until you have fired several shots?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes; that is true when the crosshairs are largely out of
the center of the tube. And in this case it is necessary to move the
crosshairs completely up into the upper portion of the tube, which
causes this spring to bear in a position out of the ordinary, and for
this windage screw to strike the side or the sloping surface of the ring
rather than at 90 degrees, as it shows in Exhibit 555. With this screw
being off center, both in windage and elevation, the spring is not
strong enough to center the crosshair ring by itself, and it is
necessary to jar it several times, which we did by firing, to bring it
to bear tightly so as to maintain the same position then for the next shots.
Mr. EISENBERG - And because of the difficulty you had stabilizing the
crosshair, you did not wish to pursue it to a further refinement, is
that correct?
Mr. FRAZIER - We sighted the scope in relatively close, fired it, and
decided rather than fire more ammunition through the weapon, we would
use these targets which we had fired.
Mr. EISENBERG - Now, once the crosshairs had been stabilized, did you
find that they stayed, remained stabilized?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes; they did.
Mr. EISENBERG - How long do you think the crosshairs would remain
stabilized in Exhibit 139, assuming no violent jar?
Mr. FRAZIER - They should remain stabilized continuously.
Mr. EISENBERG - Do you know when the defect in this scope, which causes
you not to be able to adjust the elevation crosshair in the manner it
should be do you know when this defect was introduced into the scope?
Mr. FRAZIER - No; I do not. However, on the back end of the scope tube
there is a rather severe scrape which was on this weapon when we
received it in the laboratory, in which some of the metal has been
removed, and the scope tube could have been bent or damaged.
Mr. EISENBERG - Did you first test the weapon for accuracy on November 27th?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG - Have you any way of determining whether the defect
pre-existed November 27th?
Mr. FRAZIER - When we fired on November 27th, the shots were landing
high and slightly to the right. However, the scope was apparently fairly
well stabilized at that time, because three shots would land in an area
the size of a dime under rapid-fire conditions, which would not have
occurred if the interior mechanism of the scope was shifting.
Mr. EISENBERG - But you are unable to say whether--or are you able to
say whether--the defect existed before November 27th? That is, precisely
when it was, introduced?
Mr. FRAZIER - As far as to be unable to adjust the scope, actually, I
could not say when it had been introduced. I don't know actually what
the cause is. It may be that the mount has been bent or the crosshair
ring shifted.
Mr. EISENBERG - Mr. Frazier, when you were running, let's say, the last
test, could you have compensated for this defect?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes; you could take an aiming point low and to the left
and have the shots strike a predetermined point. But it would be no
different from taking these targets and putting an aiming point in the
center of the bullet-impact area. Here that would be the situation you
would have--- an aiming point off to the side and an impact area at the
high right corner.
Mr. EISENBERG - If you had been shooting to score bulls-eyes, in a
bulls-eye pattern, what would you have what action, if any, would you
have taken, to improve your score?
Mr. FRAZIER - I would have aimed low and to the left--after finding how
high the bullets were landing; you would compensate by aiming low left,
or adjusting the mount of the scope in a manner which would cause the
hairlines to coincide with the point of impact.
Mr. EISENBERG - How much practice had you had with the rifle before the
last series of four targets were shot by you?
Mr. FRAZIER - I had fired it possibly 20 rounds, 15 to 20 rounds, and in
addition had operated the bolt repeatedly.
Mr. EISENBERG - Does practice with this weapon--or would practice with
this weapon--materially shorten the time in which three shots could be
accurately fired?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; very definitely.
Mr. EISENBERG - Would practice without actually firing the weapon be
helpful--that is, a dry-run practice?
Mr. FRAZIER - That would be most helpful, particularly in a bolt-action
weapon, where it is necessary to shift your hand from the trigger area
to the bolt, operate the bolt, and go back to the trigger after closing
the bolt.
Mr. EISENBERG - Based on your experience with the weapon, do you think
three shots could be fired accurately within 5 1/2 seconds if no rest
was utilized?
Mr. FRAZIER - That would depend on the accuracy which was necessary or
needed-or which you desired. I think you could fire the shots in that
length of time, but whether you could place them, say, in a 3- or 4-inch
circle without either resting or possibly using the sling as a
support--I doubt that you could accomplish that.
Mr. EISENBERG - How--these targets at which you fired stationary at 100
yards--how do you think your time would have been affected by use of a
moving target?
Mr. FRAZIER - It would have slowed down the shooting. It would have
lengthened the time to the extent of allowing the crosshairs to pass
over the moving target.
Mr. EISENBERG - Could you give an amount?
Mr. FRAZIER - Approximately 1 second. It would depend on how fast the
target was moving, and whether it was moving away from you or towards
you or at right angles.
Mr. EISENBERG - Do you think you could shorten your time with further
practice with the weapon?
Mr. FRAZIER - Oh, yes.
Mr. EISENBERG - Could you give us an estimate on that?
Mr. FRAZIER - I fired three shots in 4.6 seconds at 25 yards with
approximately a 3-inch spread, which is the equivalent of a 12-inch
spread at a hundred yards. And I feel that a 12-inch relative circle
could be reduced to 6 inches or even less with considerable practice
with the weapon.
Mr. EISENBERG - That is in the 4.6-second time?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes. I would say from 4.8 to 5 seconds, in that area 4.6
is firing this weapon as fast as the bolt can be operated, I think.
Mr. EISENBERG - I am now going to ask you several hypothetical questions
concerning the factors which might have affected the aim of the assassin
on November 22d, and I would like you to make the following assumptions
in answering these questions: First, that the assassin fired his shots
from the window near which the cartridges were found--that is, the
easternmost window on the south face of the sixth floor of the School
Book Depository Building, which is 60 feet above the ground, and several
more feet above the position at which the car was apparently located
when the shots were fired.
Second, that the length of the trajectory of the first shot was 175
feet, and that the length of the trajectory of the third shot was 265 feet.
And third, that the elapsed time between the firing of the first and
third shots was 5 1/2 seconds.
Based on those assumptions, Mr. Frazier, approximately what lead would
the assassin have had to give his target to compensate for its
movement--and here I would disregard any possible defect in the scope.
Mr. FRAZIER - I would say he would have to lead approximately 2 feet
under both such situations. The lead would, of course, be dependent upon
the direction in which the object was moving primarily. If it is moving
away from you, then, of course, the actual lead of, say, 2 feet which he
would have to lead would be interpreted as a considerably less lead in
elevation above the target, because the target will move the 2 feet in a
direction away from the shooter, and the apparent lead then would be cut
to one foot or 12 inches or 8 inches or something of that nature, due to
the movement of the individual.
Mr. EISENBERG - Have you made calculations to achieve the figures you gave?
Mr. FRAZIER - I made the calculations, but I don't have them with me.
Mr. EISENBERG - Could you supply these to us, either in further
testimony or by letter, Mr. Frazier?
Mr. FRAZIER - I have one object here, a diagram which will illustrate
that lead, if you would like to use that. This is drawn to scale from
these figures which you quoted as building height, and distances of 175
feet and 265 feet.
265 feet is for the head shot. That is the one where you think Oswald
was perfect and could hit the bulleye when the FBI couldn't.
