The Education Forum

# Undressing CE884, Randomly

## Recommended Posts

chris

• Replies 35
• Created

#### Popular Days

Mr. SPECTER. Were you able to ascertain the speed of the Presidential limousine at the time of the assassination?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; because we were able to determine the speed of the camera, and thereby accurately determine the length of time it takes for a specific number of frames to run through the camera at this 18.3 frames per second, and having located these frame positions in the street, we took the farthest distance point we had in the Zapruder film which was frame 161 through frame 313.

##### Share on other sites

Frames 161-313=152 frames

152 frames x .9ft per frame = 136.8ft

CE884 Frames 161-313= 136.1ft

chris

##### Share on other sites

At first glance, one might look at the difference between total distance traveled from frame 161-166 which is .9ft.

Then, from the previous post, assume that the WC made a mistake and meant to input each frame traveled from 161-166 (5 frames) was .9ft. which would then give frame 166 a Station# location of 3+33.7 or 3+29.2 + 4.5ft(5 x.9ft)= 3+33.7

And, as further proof, expand those 5 frames over an 18.3 frames per sec span.

18.3 x .9ft = 16.47 ft per sec = 11.20 mph.

See previous Shaneyfelt testimony.

See Zfilm at 161-166

chris

P.S.

But!!!

##### Share on other sites

That's a big but t.

Frame161 was never surveyed in.

In fact, frame161 survey info belongs to frame168, as was long ago revealed by Tom P.

That might get the wheel rolling a bit.

chris

##### Share on other sites

That's a big but t.

Frame161 was never surveyed in.

In fact, frame161 survey info belongs to frame168, as was long ago revealed by Tom P.

That might get the wheel rolling a bit.

chris

Really?

Why don't you match up all the measurements from the West notes to the WC exhibit and get back to us.

I'll understand why you won't.

##### Share on other sites

Craig,

I can see that you don't approve of the .9ft conversion to 11.20 mph. That is an exact recreation. Straight from the WC.

But, as you have mis-stated in the past, (imo) the recreations were much more exact than you will ever know or admit to.

chris

P.S.

Moving on!!!

##### Share on other sites

Craig,

I can see that you don't approve of the .9ft conversion to 11.20 mph. That is an exact recreation. Straight from the WC.

But, as you have mis-stated in the past, (imo) the recreations were much more exact than you will ever know or admit to.

chris

P.S.

Moving on!!!

Translated from Davidsonspeak. The numbers I quoted don't match. Let me try and wiggle out of that problem by creating a strawman.

Your attempted dodge is duly noted.

Lets try again. You say the notes from West for 168 match the 161 entries on the WC document.

Can you match up all the numbers? Its a simple questions, same as it was the first time I asked.

If you can't just say so and we can discard your theory.

BTW, do you understand the term AVERAGE?

Edited by Craig Lamson
##### Share on other sites

Moving on!!!

Thanks for proving ONCE AGAIN the inaccuracy of the GUESSES made while making this recreation.

Welcome to reality Chris.

##### Share on other sites

There is only one Station# 3+29.2, that belongs to Frame168.

Yes, Moving on.

The Vehicle Speed Analysis document supplied previously should provide you with a better comparison of what occurs when you make a 7 frame adjustment 161-168.

Since the WC likes working with averages, (easier to hide starts and stops) why not figure out the difference between the 2 averages for frames (168-185) and frames (161-185) using the Vehicle Speed Analysis chart.

168-185 = 20.84mph/2 = 10.42 mph

161-185 = 14.84mph/2 = 7.42 mph

An average difference of 3mph.

chris

##### Share on other sites

An average difference of 3 mph= 3 x 1.47ft (1mph) = 4.41ft per sec.

4.41ft sec x 6.8 sec = 29.988ft or 30ft/4.41ft sec= 6.8sec

Where is that Mandel article?

chris

P.S.

In case it didn't occur to you, that 30ft entry is somewhat important in the overall scheme of things.

##### Share on other sites

Briefly, I want to go back and get the speed of the limo from Z168-185.

Using the Vehicle Speed Analysis chart, that would be 17frames @ 20.1ft traveled.

This = 21.63 ft per sec = 14.71 mph.

14.71 mph minus the Average MPH (3.74 +2.24) added together for entries (Z168-171)+ (Z161-166)= 14.71-5.98 = 8.73mph.

8.73 mph = limo speed from frames Z133-168 = 35frames @ 24.5ft (on film). Change to "on paper"

Edited by Chris Davidson
##### Share on other sites

The reason I jumped to the limo speed was to come back and tie it back in to the 3mph/30ft scenario.

Since Z168 is actually Station# 3+29.2 (on paper at least), the frame span between this and Z255 becomes 87 frames @87.2ft traveled.

The ratio of 8.73 mph to 87.2 ft is a ratio of 1mph for 10ft.

Or, 3mph for 30ft.

See post 10 + 11 for the connection.

chris

##### Share on other sites

In order to connect the 8.73 mph to Zframes 168-255 (87.2ft) in terms that Mandel can deal with, convert 8.73mph to ft per sec.

8.73 x 1.47 = 12.83ft per sec x 6.8 sec = 87.24ft.

WC CE884 distance from Z168-255 = 87.2ft.

chris

##### Share on other sites

It always helps to convert back to time spans every once in awhile.

For instance, 87frames/18.3fps = 4.75 sec.

4.75 sec x 21.623ft sec (14.71mph) = 102.7ft

102.7ft - 87.2 = 15.5ft

That's how you make up 15.5ft, the difference between StationC 2+34.5 and the snipers nest, Station# 2+50 by the time you reach extant Z255.

chris

### Announcements

×

• #### Support

×
• Create New...