Rifle tests at former Carcano factory

[Charles Drago]

But "they" might have been a shooter with below-average skills making a serious effort to acquire and strike an elusive target moving away and downhill.

All the previous fire-and-cycle-as-fast-as-you-can-and-target-acquisition-be-damned "tests" in fact tested nothing of value except the public's willingness to bend over forward to please their masters.

When asked what these tests "proved," the answer always comes back, "that it's possible" for LHO to have done the shooting.

It's also possible that LHO sprouted wings and flew out the window in his effort to escape.

So what about additional shooting recreations involving world-class marksmen firing under conditions that, even with the best of intentions, could not come close to approximating the Dealey Plaza environment (and its psychic impacts on an ungifted, pressured rifleman)?

Worthless. Especially so the charade mounted a couple of years ago that included sophisticated, anatomically correct target dummies. If you pay attention to the shooting of these "torsos," you'll note that the anterior exit location on "Kennedy" is not shown from the front.

If it had been (based upon where, in super-slow motion, the body shot appears to be emerging), we would have seen a wound well below the above-collar throat -- a necessity for the round to be able to continue into "Connally."

Wrong? Then why did the producers decline to show a view of the front of the model?

The Italian test remains ... troubling. Perhaps we'll learn more details. But until then, we run with this ball at our own peril.

Charles

[J. Raymond Carroll]

I suspect these tests were done by some attention-seeker, and will not stand up under scrutiny. 3 shots in 19 seconds? Give me a break! That means almost 10 seconds between shots. Ridiculous. It sounds like they weren't even using a clip.

One of the questionable features of the US tests, as I recall, was that the marksmen were not required to aim at a moving target. It may be that the Italian study is the first to take account of this particular variable. Going purely from memory, I do not recall a US study that resulted in two hits out of three shots fired at a moving target at those distances within the time-frame dictated by the Zapruder film.

I make no pretense at being an expert in this area, but I know from youthful experience that it is easier to shoot a rabbit when he is sitting still.

[Edit] I just now saw Charles Drago's post. These Italian tests, when we get the full details, may indeed highlight the questionable nature of US tests done up to now.

Edited July 2, 2007 by J. Raymond Carroll

[Charles Black]

Hello all

I am a person who has during my adult lifetime been an target shooting enthusiast, and one who still shoots, as a member of several "shooters clubs", at least once weekly. I have something that I would like to add that should be quite obvious even to persons unfamiliar with shooting.

It should be obvious to all but the extremely unreasonable, that the times reported in the current Italian tests are not statements that it would take 19 seconds to "Work The Bolt".

Of course merely "the physical opening and closing of the bolt" could have been done in one third that time. What seems to be the stumbling block and a source of great misunderstading to most analysts who do not have considerable experience in actually firing weapons, is not the time required to perform the physical act of bolt manipulation, but the "truly important factor" of target acquisition, "point of aim" toward a "moving target", and most importantly...target "re-acquisition" after the rifle is moved out of position by operation of the bolt mechanism. Acquiring and reacquiring a target, then aiming (two separate operations with a moving target), CANNOT be done successfully in the W.C. time frame, with a telescopic sight...even with one which was not misaligned. Even were one to use the iron sights, the failure to have previously removed the hinderance of the telescopic sight, is well beyond reason.

Operation of the bolt "Has Never Been the Issue" !

The time involved in the Italian test, to anyone with the slightest knowledge of shooting, would take into account target reacquisition, and the mental calculation of the moving speed of the target, its angle of declination as well as wind direction and speed.

A year or so ago, I suggested a very simple test that would prove to ANYONE in doubt, the difficulty of target re-acquisition which has always been "THE" problem. If one will take a pair of binoculars, acqure an airplane or a bird in flight, even at low altitude, remove the binoculars from your eyes and try to reacquire the bird in flight.....you wil see the diificult of reacquiring in a gunsight, an object of canteloupe size, which is moving away from you at a distance of nearly 90 yards at an inconstant speed.

The nearly 20 seconds reported should be near the time required for reacquisition and shooting of one familiar with the weapon....HOWEVER....20 seconds in no way guarantees hits on the moving target.

For some reason there are masses of people who have been unable to comprehend what expert marksmen have been telling them for nearly 44 years. It

"was humanly impossible" in the time frame given by the W.C. This act is "IN NO WAY COMPARABLE" to skeet shooting with a shotgun !

Though I am certain that some of you will be willing to be seated at your keyboards for an hour in an effort to argue this FACT....very few of you will choose to pick up a set of binoculars, and WASTE the ten or fifteen seconds required to prove it to yourselves.

There are many talkers....but few doers !

Charles Black

[Francesca Akhtar]

I suggest we obtain the test results and send them to Sen. Specter and Mr. Bugliosi.

Good idea! I offer to add a few choice Italian phrases just for Vincenzo!

Here is the link to the ANSA report, I hope. Now with your gift for choice Italian phrases, if you could only post a transcript you will be eligible for a special prize.

http://www.ansa.it/norep/video_new.jsp?t=&...1541.rm&dt=

If I can load the video then I will try to do it asap. Sometimes I have problems with big files as I'm still on dialup but I'll have a go. I 'll report back later.

A Presto!

[J. Raymond Carroll]

There are many talkers....but few doers !

Charles Black

Nice one Charlie.

I think Fidel Castro has been reading your posts.

Reuters QUOTE ON: Castro, a master sharp-shooter with a telescopic rifle, insists Lee Harvey Oswald could not have been the only shooter in Dallas.

"You loose the target after every shot even if it is not moving and have to find it again in fractions of a second," he said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idU...=22&sp=true

[Francesca Akhtar]

Success! It loads fine. I have a few things to do this evening so I willl try and have the transcript done by tomorrow at some point.

[Pat Speer]

From patspeer.com, chapter 3, on the investigation performed by the Warren Commission

On 6-2-64 General Counsel Rankin writes a letter to Lt. Col. Allison G. Folsom, a Marine Corps officer in charge of personnel, requesting an appraisal of Oswald’s shooting ability, based upon Oswald’s test scores while in the Marines. On 6-8-64, he receives an unexpected response. Folsom writes “In view of the lapse of time since Mr. Oswald was separated from the Marine Corps, it would be impossible to ascertain precisely the number of hours in which he participated in weapons marksmanship practice or how many rounds of ammunition he fired.” He then gives a breakdown of the training received by Oswald and his subsequent tests scores. These show that Oswald was tested on the M-1 rifle on December 21, 1956 and received a score of 212, or sharpshooter ranking. This was the test discussed in Folsom’s 5-1-64 testimony. The record shows that Oswald was tested on the M-1 rifle a second time on May 6, 1959, however, and received a score of 191, only 1 point above the bottom of the Marksman ranking. These were the scores reported by the New York Times on 11-23-63. The big surprise for Rankin comes in Folsom’s summary. He tells Rankin “The Marine Corps considers that any reasonable application of the instructions given to Marines should permit them to become qualified as a marksman. To become qualified as a sharpshooter, the Marine Corps is of the opinion that most Marines with a reasonable amount of adaptability to weapons firing can become so qualified. Consequently, a low marksman qualification indicates a rather poor “shot” and a sharpshooter qualification indicates a fairly good “shot.” Folsom was thus telling Rankin that Oswald was a poor shot when he left the Marines and would have been an even worse shot after 4 years without practice.

The Tests That Should Have Been

After the letter from Folsom, Rankin should have had great doubt that Oswald was capable of hitting the shots described by the FBI. The FBI, after all, claimed Oswald fired three times at a moving target and created two hits and one near miss (the bullet striking Connally) in a time span of roughly 5.6 seconds. In an ideal world, this would have led Rankin to push for more rifle tests, with civilians firing rifles similar to Oswald’s at moving targets in a mock Dealey Plaza. If he had, his results would probably have been similar to the results obtained by CBS news in 1967. While the CBS shooters were all well-practiced rifleman, their over-all skill level was roughly that of Oswald, at his best. Of course, Oswald hadn’t been at his best since his first years in the Marines, a half a dozen years before the assassination. The CBS shooters were also given a few test shots. This would normally have worked to their advantage. But let the test results speak for themselves…

1. Col. Jim Crossman, ret. (expert rifleman). First attempt--3 near misses in 6.54 seconds. Best attempt (of 6) ---2 hits and 1 near miss in 6.20 seconds. 2 hits or more in 3 of 6 attempts. (6.34, 6.44, and 6.2 seconds)

2. Douglas Bazemore (ex-paratrooper). First attempt—unable to operate bolt effectively to fire the shots. Best attempt (of 4)—unable to operate stiff bolt action; gives up. 2 hits or more in 0 of 4 attempts.

3. John Bollendorf (ballistics technician). First attempt—2 hits and 1 near miss in 6.8 seconds. Best attempt (of 4)—the same. 2 hits or more in 1 of 4 attempts. (6.8 seconds)

4. John Concini (Maryland State Trooper). First attempt—no record of where hits went.in 6.3 seconds. Best attempt (of 2)—1 hit and 2 near misses in 5.4 seconds. 2 hits or more in 0 of 2 attempts.

5. Howard Donahue (weapons engineer). First attempt—too fast with bolt—gun jammed. Best attempt (of 3)—3 hits in 5.2 seconds. 2 hits or more in 1 of 3 attempts. (5.2 seconds)

6. Somersett Fitchett (sportsman). First attempt—gun jammed at 3rd shot. Best attempt (of 3)—2 hits and 1 near miss in 5.5 seconds. 2 hits or more in 2 of 3 attempts. (5.9 and 5.5 seconds)

7. William Fitchett (sporting goods dealer). First attempt—3 borderline hits in 6.5 seconds. Best attempt (of 3)—the same. 2 hits or more in 1of 3 attempts. (6.5 seconds)

8. Ron George (Maryland State Trooper). First attempt—gun jammed at 2nd shot. Best attempt (of 3)—2 hits and 1 near miss in 4.9 seconds. 2 hits or more in 1 of 3 attempts. (4.9 seconds)

9. Charles Hamby (shooting range employee). First attempt—gun jammed. Best attempt (of 3)—2 near misses and 1 complete miss in 6.5 seconds. 2 hits or more in 0 of 3 attempts.

10. Carl Holden (shooting range employee). First attempt—gun jammed with first shot. Best attempt (of 3)—3 near misses in 5.4 seconds. 2 hits or more in 0 of 3 attempts.

11. Sid Price (shooting range employee). First attempt—1 hit, 1 near miss, and 1 complete miss in 5.9 seconds. Best attempt (of 4)—the same. 2 hits or more in 0 of 4 attempts.

12. Al Sherman (Maryland State Trooper). First attempt—2 hits and 1 near miss in 5.0 seconds. Best attempt (of 5)—the same. 2 hits or more in 2 of 5 attempts. (5.0 and 6.0 seconds)

Of the 12 first attempts, only 1 shooter was able to make two hits in less than 5.6 seconds. Of the 43 total attempts, moreover, these well-seasoned shooters were able to replicate Oswald’s purported feat—2 hits in less than 5.6 seconds—just 4 times. If the Warren Commission had conducted similar tests, they would almost certainly have concluded that Oswald needed more than 5.6 seconds to fire the shots, and that either the first shot or last shot missed. But this was not to be.

[Shanet Clark]

Pat

Did the "Oswald" rifle have a clip?

I have read on the Forum that the Carcano

had no clip and was loading the chamber by hand...

[Charles Drago]

Carcano experts, please chime in.

If I'm not mistaken:

1. There was a clip.

2. It was designed to drop from the rifle after the last round was chambered (fired?).

3. The problem with the weapon found in the "sniper's nest" was that an empty clip was in it.

Is this not so?

Tentatively,

Charles

[Christopher Hall]

From patspeer.com, chapter 3, on the investigation performed by the Warren Commission

On 6-2-64 General Counsel Rankin writes a letter to Lt. Col. Allison G. Folsom, a Marine Corps officer in charge of personnel, requesting an appraisal of Oswald’s shooting ability, based upon Oswald’s test scores while in the Marines. On 6-8-64, he receives an unexpected response. Folsom writes “In view of the lapse of time since Mr. Oswald was separated from the Marine Corps, it would be impossible to ascertain precisely the number of hours in which he participated in weapons marksmanship practice or how many rounds of ammunition he fired.” He then gives a breakdown of the training received by Oswald and his subsequent tests scores. These show that Oswald was tested on the M-1 rifle on December 21, 1956 and received a score of 212, or sharpshooter ranking. This was the test discussed in Folsom’s 5-1-64 testimony. The record shows that Oswald was tested on the M-1 rifle a second time on May 6, 1959, however, and received a score of 191, only 1 point above the bottom of the Marksman ranking. These were the scores reported by the New York Times on 11-23-63. The big surprise for Rankin comes in Folsom’s summary. He tells Rankin “The Marine Corps considers that any reasonable application of the instructions given to Marines should permit them to become qualified as a marksman. To become qualified as a sharpshooter, the Marine Corps is of the opinion that most Marines with a reasonable amount of adaptability to weapons firing can become so qualified. Consequently, a low marksman qualification indicates a rather poor “shot” and a sharpshooter qualification indicates a fairly good “shot.” Folsom was thus telling Rankin that Oswald was a poor shot when he left the Marines and would have been an even worse shot after 4 years without practice.

The Tests That Should Have Been

After the letter from Folsom, Rankin should have had great doubt that Oswald was capable of hitting the shots described by the FBI. The FBI, after all, claimed Oswald fired three times at a moving target and created two hits and one near miss (the bullet striking Connally) in a time span of roughly 5.6 seconds. In an ideal world, this would have led Rankin to push for more rifle tests, with civilians firing rifles similar to Oswald’s at moving targets in a mock Dealey Plaza. If he had, his results would probably have been similar to the results obtained by CBS news in 1967. While the CBS shooters were all well-practiced rifleman, their over-all skill level was roughly that of Oswald, at his best. Of course, Oswald hadn’t been at his best since his first years in the Marines, a half a dozen years before the assassination. The CBS shooters were also given a few test shots. This would normally have worked to their advantage. But let the test results speak for themselves…

1. Col. Jim Crossman, ret. (expert rifleman). First attempt--3 near misses in 6.54 seconds. Best attempt (of 6) ---2 hits and 1 near miss in 6.20 seconds. 2 hits or more in 3 of 6 attempts. (6.34, 6.44, and 6.2 seconds)

2. Douglas Bazemore (ex-paratrooper). First attempt—unable to operate bolt effectively to fire the shots. Best attempt (of 4)—unable to operate stiff bolt action; gives up. 2 hits or more in 0 of 4 attempts.

3. John Bollendorf (ballistics technician). First attempt—2 hits and 1 near miss in 6.8 seconds. Best attempt (of 4)—the same. 2 hits or more in 1 of 4 attempts. (6.8 seconds)

4. John Concini (Maryland State Trooper). First attempt—no record of where hits went.in 6.3 seconds. Best attempt (of 2)—1 hit and 2 near misses in 5.4 seconds. 2 hits or more in 0 of 2 attempts.

5. Howard Donahue (weapons engineer). First attempt—too fast with bolt—gun jammed. Best attempt (of 3)—3 hits in 5.2 seconds. 2 hits or more in 1 of 3 attempts. (5.2 seconds)

6. Somersett Fitchett (sportsman). First attempt—gun jammed at 3rd shot. Best attempt (of 3)—2 hits and 1 near miss in 5.5 seconds. 2 hits or more in 2 of 3 attempts. (5.9 and 5.5 seconds)

7. William Fitchett (sporting goods dealer). First attempt—3 borderline hits in 6.5 seconds. Best attempt (of 3)—the same. 2 hits or more in 1of 3 attempts. (6.5 seconds)

8. Ron George (Maryland State Trooper). First attempt—gun jammed at 2nd shot. Best attempt (of 3)—2 hits and 1 near miss in 4.9 seconds. 2 hits or more in 1 of 3 attempts. (4.9 seconds)

9. Charles Hamby (shooting range employee). First attempt—gun jammed. Best attempt (of 3)—2 near misses and 1 complete miss in 6.5 seconds. 2 hits or more in 0 of 3 attempts.

10. Carl Holden (shooting range employee). First attempt—gun jammed with first shot. Best attempt (of 3)—3 near misses in 5.4 seconds. 2 hits or more in 0 of 3 attempts.

11. Sid Price (shooting range employee). First attempt—1 hit, 1 near miss, and 1 complete miss in 5.9 seconds. Best attempt (of 4)—the same. 2 hits or more in 0 of 4 attempts.

12. Al Sherman (Maryland State Trooper). First attempt—2 hits and 1 near miss in 5.0 seconds. Best attempt (of 5)—the same. 2 hits or more in 2 of 5 attempts. (5.0 and 6.0 seconds)

Of the 12 first attempts, only 1 shooter was able to make two hits in less than 5.6 seconds. Of the 43 total attempts, moreover, these well-seasoned shooters were able to replicate Oswald’s purported feat—2 hits in less than 5.6 seconds—just 4 times. If the Warren Commission had conducted similar tests, they would almost certainly have concluded that Oswald needed more than 5.6 seconds to fire the shots, and that either the first shot or last shot missed. But this was not to be.

Did the CBS exercise involve moving targets?

Also, it would be interesting to know what type of field of vision the Carcano's scope provided.

Sometimes a very narrow field of vision will occur when certain adjustments to the scope have been made.

The nature and name of the scope feature doesn't come to mind, but, when present, it can make for a field of vision which takes extra time for me to pick up.

I would find it considerably easier to try to quickly pick up the target through iron sights than a mil-dot scope, but I am not much of a rifleman.

Update:

The scope adjustment to which I was referring is the adjustment for eye relief.

Edited July 2, 2007 by Christopher Hall

[Pat Speer]

The video of the Italian tests shows they did use a clip. The reason it took so long is cause the shooter pauses FOREVER between shots. Presumably he does this to account for target re-acquisition, but it does seem awfully and deliberately slow. At the end of the video they shoot a side of beef with no bones. The bullet dug out of the beef is considerably more damaged than CE 399.

As far as the CBS tests, they were probably the most accurate to date. They used the same make of gun as Oswald's with the same make of scope as Oswald's and fired the same kind of ammunition. They did this from a 60 ft. tower. The target moved away from the shooter on a downward slope and at a similar angle. They used a variety of shooters, with varying levels of skill.

Where their marksman had a disadvantage: most of them had never fired such a rifle before.

Where their marksman had an advantage: the scope on this rifle was properly aligned; the target moved away from them at a constant rate of speed; the marksman were given a few practice shots before their attempts; there was very little wind on the range.

Even with these advantages, these shooters, all of whom would be expected to perform better than Oswald, as Oswald, according to the WC, hadn't practiced for months, did not exactly burn down the house. Only one hit two of three on the first try and only 4 of 43 attempts was successful. Keep in mind that the FBI and SS had determined that Oswald had hit 3 of 3 in this same amount of time. Only one shooter was able to accomplish this--strangely enough this shooter was Howard Donahue, the same Howard Donahue who would eventually conclude Kennedy was killed by SS Agent George Hickey.

[Charles Black]

Charles D. et al

The rifle did contain a magazine in which there remained one unfired round. The person who placed this rifle in the sniper's lair, did not even begin his task with a fully loaded magazine. To any of you who have hunted a "dangerous or very important prey", has there ever been an ocassion in which you purposely entered the fray "without a fully loaded weapon?"

Whatever the reason for THIS weapon to have been found in the "snipers lair", this fact alone should indicate to experienced shooters, that it was not used by a seasoned hunter or shooter.....during the "most mportant hunt" in which they would ever participate !

Even if one were to completely disregard the Carcano factory testing....HOW could any rational person believe, without having a pre conceived mind "SET", that a person of even minimal intelligence would have chosen this rifle for ANY shooting purpose......much less the assassination of the most powerful man on earth? EXCEPT TO FINGER LHO !

Is this the type of "research" that some of you suppose will break this case? Is this worthy of even more "CONJECTURE?"

There is and has never been one scintilla of evidence, that places Oswald in the firing position at 12:30 CST.

I suppose that some of you are "EXPERTS".... in exercise of futiity.

You can not leave the 43 year old proven fantasies alone.....what is worse yet IMO...you are absolutely unwilling to address new theories.

I suppose that many have decided that if you cannot solve this with the old "evidence"....you are

adamantly opposed to any other solution.

What is the Name of this forum?

OF COURSE I am complaining !

Charles Black

[Jack White]

"Even if one were to completely disregard the Carcano factory testing....HOW could any rational person believe, without having a pre conceived mind "SET", that a person of even minimal intelligence would have chosen this rifle for ANY shooting purpose......much less the assassination of the most powerful man on earth? EXCEPT TO FINGER LHO !"

Charlie...there is absolutely ZERO credible evidence tying LHO

to the gun on the Sixth Floor.

Every piece of so-called "evidence" would be laughed out of court

today. For example see

http://jfkresearch.freehomepage.com/c2766.html

...and there is a lot more than this.

Jack

[Charles Drago]

Charles B.,

Check the alignment of the stars. Are the arms of Orion askew?

We are in agreement!

The only mystery surrounding the Carcano is why the conspirators would have chosen to link what for all intents and purposes is a non-functional weapon to LHO.

A few likely solutions come to mind:

1. A "message" was being sent and more false sponsors tainted: Sam Cummings and Interarmco were linked to worldwide Carcano sales. Linked to Cummings are ...

2. In line with Peter Dale Scott's multi-phase conspiracy scenario, competent, uncorrupted investigators would detect conspiracy before the echoes in Dealey Plaza faded. The third phase -- the lone nut fiction crafted to mollify the public AND give shaken officialdom a fallback position -- would be enhanced by the proposition that the dumb-lucky nut in question pulled it off with such an inferior weapon.

So, Charles, if there is a mystery to be discerned in the Carcano, you are right to state that it has NOTHING to do with whether or not that particular weapon was used in the Kennedy shooting, but rather with the conspiratorial subtext of its ostensibly counter-intuitive choice as the LN's instrument of regicide.

Charles Drago

[Charles Black]

Charles D.

Well I'll be damned ! If possible, I may be more shocked than thee !

We must be careful so as not to make a habit of this !

Charles Black