The Education Forum

# Chris Davidson

Members

3,265

## Everything posted by Chris Davidson

That's fine. Next would be a sync for both films near the underpass. If you know the Bell (progressive) frame count between this location and the previous z435 location, this will give you a FPS ratio from Bell to Z using 18.3fps per Z.

Continuing forward: Would you agree/disagree that these two frames sync?

I am wrong about Bell's filming location. I agree with your summary. I wonder if he just hopped down right in front from up above. If not, that is quite alright. That said, this changes only slightly, the syncing of Bell/Z. More to come. Thanks.

The distance between the two (JFK in the limo) locations in the previous gif (z437-z445.5) = 20.62ft My average speed for this span = 30.2mph. 18.3/8.5 x 20.62ft = 44.39ft per sec /1.47 In your animation, that same frame span yields an average of 30.5mph. Almost matching.

You do have the limo position fairly accurate for extant z437(very important). Bell starts filming slightly before that. Something like this:

I disagree. Start with this: Bell's physical filming location for this segment is incorrect. Bell's starting time for this same segment (extant z460) is also incorrect.

Did you know that the original Wiegman film is 36.5 seconds long? If you used a shortened version say Groden’s version(inset) for syncing, the missing frames occur after Wiegman starts but before his kneel. Your time to his kneel is approx 20.75 seconds. The original syncs this event at 24 + 8/30 = 24.26seconds. 24.26sec - 20.75 sec = 3.51sec = missing film You can then convert those time differences in terms of frame rate: 24.27 x 24 = 582.24 frames 582.24 / 20.75sec = 28.05fps

This might help with the previous post if it appears somewhat confusing. I'll push the frame comparison forward from your animation to z186. You have the limo traveling at 11.1 mph. Adding a missing distance of 5.49ft = 3.74mph over a 1second time frame to 11.1mph = 11.1 + 3.74 = 14.84mph. Deciphered from the previous posting, 14.84mph sits quite appropriately between 14.65/14.94mph. Since Shaneyfelt's testimony included the average figure of 11.2mph via z161/8- z313, your instantaneous speed at z186 complements the desired WC average speed for a distance/time they saw fit to manipulate. imo

Mark, I agree. They do not pass the smell test. The reason they do not is to hide the alteration of the extant film. Plotted, using the location of known stationary objects and "JFK's head within the limo" as the marker. As you can see, the limo was traveling at approx the same speed from(z136-z149) and CE884 (z168-186), disregarding the B.S entry of z168-z171 = 3.74mph. And, coincidentally, adding 5.49 missing feet to increase your mph up to the splice(frame156.5) within a certain amount of frames, would match the same speed (14.65mph) as the plotting provides. The other version of CE884 has the limo move .9ft in 5 frames = 2.24mph You can't smooth this out. The limo had to travel a certain distance (unaccounted for) above and beyond that .9ft. Overlooking this very fundamental concept is a mistake. imo

Mark, One of the most important elements in a study such as yours is the inclusion of distance traveled. imo The following is an example: I have layered two frames from your study: z133.4 -z161.4 = 28 frames Your mph designation for this span has the limo travel from 8.5mph (slowest) to 9.6mph (fastest). This would equal an average of 9.05mph. I've included Sprague's plotting for Z133 which I confirmed via my own plotting at Station# 2+99.0 WC CE884 plotted Z161 at Station# 3+29.2 The distance for these 28 frames = 329.2 - 299 = 30.2ft You used 18.3fps as the frame rate for the extant Zfilm. 28/18.3 = 1.53 seconds. 30.2ft/1.53 seconds = 19.738ft per sec /1.47 (1mph-rounded off) = 13.427mph At 9.05mph x 1.47ft per sec = 13.30ft per sec x 1.53 sec = 20.35ft traveled. 30.2ft - 20.35ft = 9.85ft distance traveled unaccounted for because of the difference in the vehicle speeds. If you wanted to fix this in terms of a different frame rate for the extant Z film, approx 41.55fps would work.

Mark, The mayors car apparently would have been just out of view in Altgens 6. Somewhere between the green arrows. imo Altgens z255- z180 = 75/18.3 = 4.09 sec. The distance traveled from the mayors car front end(you can draw a LOS from Z's pedestal touching the circular wall edge and on through Houston & Elm St) that we see in z180 to Wiegman's beginning is approx 57ft (65ft - 1/2 mayors car length=(8ft). 57/4.09sec = 13.93ft per sec = 9.48mph. If you plot JFK within the limo in Towner (using 18.3fps as a true rate) over the approx same span as the mayors car from z180-z255, the average speed is 8.82mph. This would indicate the motorcade increased (minimally) the speed through the Elm St turn vs the limo.
12. ## Trying to Understand this Bronson Frame

Following up on this: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_mWn1FEZ6dMXqjM-V12r9XK1DUXJsSDR/view?usp=sharing The video starts with Bell which represents extant z437 approx. Z437-z313 = 124/18.3 = 6.77sec Bell filming Hester as Hester disappears into the shadow colonnade (This is the important sync point with Wiegman) = 7.86sec. Then Bell up to the Couch/Darnell overlap = 1.47sec. And, Baker within Couch/Darnell until he runs off camera = 4.37 sec. This total = 20.47 seconds. When you break down Wiegman's film, he starts panning back toward the TSBD(extantz313) at approx Wiegman frame 85 and films Hester into the colonnade shadow at frame 562. 562-85 = 477frames/24fps = 19.875 sec. Then Bell up to the Couch/Darnell overlap = 1.47sec. And, Baker within Couch/Darnell until he runs off camera = 4.37 sec. Their is approx 3.5sec missing from Groden's version of Wiegman during the previous mentioned time spans, so add that to the total time. Total time = approx 29.21 seconds for Baker reaching the curb. This is fairly close to what I originally came up with, just more detail provided. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/24615-mrs-stanton-mrs-sanders-where-are-you/?do=findComment&comment=369269 Total time Bell didn't film(or missing film) during Wiegman's span = 29.21sec - 20.47sec = approx 8.74sec.
13. ## Swan-Song -- Math Rules

I only suggest the bottom floor location for a "over the limo" miss at approx extant z152, since I can plot two endpoints (path) between bullet impact and shooter which agrees ballistically. That said, it's possible a warning shot (lack of explanation) was fired well above his head from a higher elevation (any floor) at approx extant z152, which could still hit the grass location previously referred to. But Why? JFK's back shot would be indicative of a location from higher up than the bottom floor. imo Since I don't have endpoints for the back shot, there are many possibilities.
14. ## Swan-Song -- Math Rules

David, Did you have a specific shot/limo location in mind?
15. ## Swan-Song -- Math Rules

Similar (check LOS in previous Sprague plat) to this view:
16. ## Swan-Song -- Math Rules

One more analogy. CE560 utilized a lead height of .56ft = 6.7". This was supposed to be from the 6th floor snipers nest using a slant distance of 175ft. You can compare that lead height to what I previously provided: The difference being 60"- 52.78" = 7.22" Fairly close leads, just two different locations. Personally, I believe the DalTex building housed multiple shooters on different floors.
17. ## Swan-Song -- Math Rules

Altgen's z255 LOS was fairly close. His photo(inset) would be approx 5.5sec after z152. Look behind Ladybird/driver/Yarborough for an opening in the crowd. It would have to come from the windows directly above the cycle cop within the inset. Does it lead back to one of those bottom floor windows?
18. ## Swan-Song -- Math Rules

Too much activity over by the DalTex bottom floor windows. If they are slider windows, the openings reside at the same elevation as the platform previously mentioned.
19. ## Swan-Song -- Math Rules

Extant zfilm with missing frames added via Groden version. Human reaction to an external stimuli = approx 5 zframes. JFK head turn.
20. ## Swan-Song -- Math Rules

That said, ballistically, a logical scenario for a missed (over the limo top) DalTex shot around extant z152 (imo) would probably transpire this way: Slant distance to grass of approx 439ft. Slant distance to JFK in limo at z152 approx 179ft. DalTex platform approx 4ft above sidewalk. Gun barrel slightly above the platform (angled at approx 1.11° .53°) is approx 4.5ft above the DalTex platform (Red X's) which is approx 8.5 above the DalTex street height. 179/439 = .4 x 8.5ft = 3.46ft 8.5ft - 3.46ft = 5.04ft x 12" = 60" Top of JFK's head = 52.78" Limo top = 57" Limo descends 1.7ft(extant z film-1.08ft per frame) in the time it takes a bullet fired at 2160ft per sec to reach its first 179ft mark. JFK hears gun shot and reacts with head turn (not as fast as in the extant zfilm) but a reaction, none the less. Shooter miscalculated slightly, the limo's declination and overshoots target. Edits in Bold Addition to graphic reflects new angle aimed at JFK's head. Shooter sitting or lying on the platform.
21. ## Swan-Song -- Math Rules

Height? No. The back and throat wounds didn't completely traverse JFK's body. Location, I believe so. Official story- Compound angle problems.
22. ## Swan-Song -- Math Rules

David, Building up from the 2nd to 3rd floor @ 3.27ft above ground from elev 423.07(shot#1-SS/FBI Dec-1963 plat) According to Drommer , the DalTex 6th floor ledge was 10.5ft higher than the TSBD 6th floor ledge. Four floors from the 2nd to the 6th floor = 10.5ft/4 = (2.625ft per floor + 10ft per floor + 24.46 = 37.085ft) The same base distance (as the 2nd floor) is necessary so a match from the DalTex 3rd floor window ledge would look like this:
23. ## Swan-Song -- Math Rules

Extending the Sprague Dal-Tex shooter location: The 4 red boxes consist of: 1. Photo depiction 2. LOS crossing JFK's path at approx z152 3. PositionA 4. Sprague's shooter
24. ## Swan-Song -- Math Rules

The cumulative affect resulting in a recreation reflecting the intersecting point approx 2.21" below the collartop:
25. ## Swan-Song -- Math Rules

In regards to the HSCA 9ft rise integration approx match, the overall rise/run looks like this (imo): 13.54”rise/36”run = 20.61° + 3.13° = 23.74° overall reduced by a rise of 2.21” = 20.60° In essence, a 2.21” rise/run reduction, eliminates the 3.13° Elm St slope in an equation where the location was 9ft above the 6th floor window sill connected to the chalk mark @ 3.27ft above the street, essentially creating the same matching angle of 20.6°
×

• #### Support

×
• Create New...