Chris Davidson Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Using the FBI's WCD298 measurements - this is what the shots looked like and their distances... Sorry, but no way Z166 is at a 26 degree angle to the 6th floor window... when THEIR first shot at around 210-220 shows the angle already steeper than 26 degrees.... and there STILL remains that final shot down by Altgens... You are now starting to understand your own topic "trajectories" in relationship to the rest of the master equation. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 Once you know the vertical/horizontal ratio then it would also help to know where that 3.15 degree grade begins. Elevation and Station# attached. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted January 12, 2014 Author Share Posted January 12, 2014 So the question remains... either the shot was calculated where/when it actually occurs, much closer to the window and probably during the Zapruder cut prior to z133... and/or he is providing angles and trajectories for the ACTUAL shots while placing them in the wrong spots on the Zfilm. NOW... with the 3.15 degrees decline not starting until that far down Elm... why does the road slope matter Chris, when the only angle that mattered was the LOS from the window to JFK's back. At a great enough angle the laser dot would drop 10 inches in the 4.5 feet and even the .9 foot - with a high enough angle... yet that again puts him directly under the window, not down the street at z166. Here is Hickey's reaction as they come out of the turn between z140 and z170, just as little Willis turns as she is running Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 I suggest you compare this to the entries for frame 161 on WC CE884. That would be the document I have implored others to pay attention to, in the past. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted January 12, 2014 Author Share Posted January 12, 2014 (edited) Chris - could you please just state what you mean in plain english... If I read you right... you are saying exactly what I did, the 26 degree angle is much too low for a shot at 161.. it is rather.. it would have to be 45 yards further down Elm for a 26 degree line to hit the 6th floor window... Same as I said... the angle for the math to work is 69 degrees... so the MATH is lying.. edit: he is describing a position much further down the street... but not 30 feet, now it's 135 feet... so the math is a complete sham in CE884 Please relate that to the Zfilm and how they moved the shots seen in the film up the street by 30 odd feet... Moorman takes her photo at the moment of the headshot... yet Altgens claims it occurs 15 feet in front of him... Please relate the math cover-up to the elements seen in the films and photos.. Thanks DJ Edited January 12, 2014 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted January 12, 2014 Author Share Posted January 12, 2014 OK Chris... CE884 states that in 20.1 vertical feet (z161: 3+29.2 to z185: 3+49.3) the limo descends 1.12 horizontal feet (13.44 inches) 429.25 to 428.13 that equates to a 9.7 degree incline - (The formula is not arctan but tan*100) which is the tangent of 5.582137 which is the % of incline based on the figures in CE884. which is obviously much more than the 3 degree slope of the street. Another 22.2 feet to 3+71.1, z207 and another 1 foot vertical drop.. again about a 9 degree slope, yet during this same distance the horizon's angle DROPS (flattens) 3 degrees from 24-14' to 21-50'.. Neat trick. Another 22 feet to 3+93.5, z231 and another 1.3 foot vertical drop.... and again the slope flattens from 21-50' to 19-47' From 231 to 249 is 17 feet, which is an even higher angle of decent.. and drops yet another vertical foot and the angle continues to flatten from the 6th floor.... http://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0464b.htm I should add that the facts which we now have in our possession, submitted to us in separate reports from the FBI and Secret Service, are totally incorrect and, if left uncorrected, will present a completely misleading picture. Redlich to Rankin 4/27/64 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 12, 2014 Share Posted January 12, 2014 David, Now you're starting to think like the WC. They did throw in another variable to help with the scheme. It would be the height of JFK's head above the pavement. This allowed them some leeway with the shift in vertical/horizontal/trajectory ratios/distances. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 David, Before I get to far ahead, I want to go back and show you what a little true math reveals. Station # 3+29.2 = frame 161 according to CE884, which is 79.2ft down Elm from Station# 2+50. Station# 2+50 being in direct alignment with the 6th floor snipers nest. And coincidentally, that is where the slope of Elm begins. We know the elevation at Station# 2+50 is 429.70 You can now use the equation for a 3.15 degree slope @79.2ft. 79.2ft/31.75ft = 2.50 elevation change. Elevation 429.70 - 2.50 = elevation 427.20 And, when compared to the elevation listed on CE884 for frame161, there is an elevation difference between true elevation 4+27.20 and WC elevation listing of 4+29.25 = 2.05ft chris P.S. The height of JFK's head measured above the street in all surveys was the same and more than 2.05ft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 I supplied this a few posts ago with the red box entry blacked out. WC determination of JFK's head height above the pavement. Since the TSBD 6th floor was determined to be 60.7ft in vertical elevation, someone realized very early on there was a major problem. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 By the way, keep in mind that 3.27ft vertically = 103.9ft horizontally @ 3.15 degrees. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Hey Chris Great work you are doing here. I, and likely a lot other members, are really hoping you'll be able to give us a slightly dumbed down version that we will be able to comprehend. So far, it seems to me you are saying the shots all occurred much further down Elm St. than the WC claimed. This makes me think of James Altgens testimony, in which he testified the first shot occurred at the same moment he took the famous Altgens 6 photo which, of course, has been established as having been taken at z255 in the Zapruder film. While JFK does seem to be reacting to something in the Altgens 6 photo, it has always struck me as odd that there is no reaction from the onlookers at all. If we are to believe the first xxxx was at z210, this means almost 2.5 seconds have elapsed. This time increases if we believe those who claim the first shot occurred even earlier. Outside of the two SS men looking back at the TSBD, you would not think anything out of the ordinary had occurred. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Hi Robert, This is as simplified as I can explain it. Mostly, I stay away from the photos, films and testimony for now, because the math eventually should take care of it. imo Reverse engineering the WC creation takes time, but those interested should already have a clearer understanding of how they went about it. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 (edited) David, Before I get to far ahead, I want to go back and show you what a little true math reveals. Station # 3+29.2 = frame 161 according to CE884, which is 79.2ft down Elm from Station# 2+50. Station# 2+50 being in direct alignment with the 6th floor snipers nest. And coincidentally, that is where the slope of Elm begins. We know the elevation at Station# 2+50 is 429.70 You can now use the equation for a 3.15 degree slope @79.2ft. 79.2ft/31.75ft = 2.50 elevation change. Elevation 429.70 - 2.50 = elevation 427.20 And, when compared to the elevation listed on CE884 for frame161, there is an elevation difference between true elevation 4+27.20 and WC elevation listing of 4+29.25 = 2.05ft chris P.S. The height of JFK's head measured above the street in all surveys was the same and more than 2.05ft Keep this difference in mind 2.05ft. The WC CE884 entry for elevation of frame 161 is 429.25. If you subtract the height of JFK's head from this you arrive at 429.25 - 3.27 = Elevation 425.98. Well, I know the true elevation should be 427.20. So I have a difference of 427.20 - 425.98 = 1.22ft elevation difference So, if you split the difference between JFK's "height from ground to 3.27ft" in relation to true elevation for frame 161 you get 2.05ft-1.22ft = .83ft elevation difference. Actually .833 And, .833 X 31.75ft = 26.4ft + 3.6ft = 30ft. This clearly shows how they incorporated splitting the difference for use in there ongoing/downstreet calculations. chris Edited January 13, 2014 by Chris Davidson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 13, 2014 Share Posted January 13, 2014 Hey Chris Great work you are doing here. I, and likely a lot other members, are really hoping you'll be able to give us a slightly dumbed down version that we will be able to comprehend. So far, it seems to me you are saying the shots all occurred much further down Elm St. than the WC claimed. This makes me think of James Altgens testimony, in which he testified the first shot occurred at the same moment he took the famous Altgens 6 photo which, of course, has been established as having been taken at z255 in the Zapruder film. While JFK does seem to be reacting to something in the Altgens 6 photo, it has always struck me as odd that there is no reaction from the onlookers at all. If we are to believe the first xxxx was at z210, this means almost 2.5 seconds have elapsed. This time increases if we believe those who claim the first shot occurred even earlier. Outside of the two SS men looking back at the TSBD, you would not think anything out of the ordinary had occurred. Robert, Frame255. This comparison might help you understand more of the subtle differences involved. If you look at CE884 entry for frame 255 the Station# is 4+16.4 The snipers nest is in alignment at Station# 2+50. That is a difference of 166.4ft. The entry for the elevation is 424.46. We know the snipers nest was measured at 60.7ft high at an elevation of 429.70. 429.70- 424.46 = 5.24ft elevation change from Station# 2+50 to Station# 4+16.4 60.7ft + 5.24ft = 65.94ft. This is the entry in the attachment. Running the equation for a 3.15 degree street grade. 5.242/166.4 x 100 = .0315 So one might look at this and say that frame 255 is reflective of a 3.15 degree street grade. But, the slant distance to JFK's head would be incorrect by some 25.7ft. If you were to change the angle of "rifle to JFK's head by "2degrees 1 minute" (left side of attachment) you now have a matching CE884 frame255 entry slant distance of 218ft. chris P.S. I did not include/describe the difference between a slant measurement to the "ground and 3.27ft higher" but that would be approx 10ft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted January 15, 2014 Share Posted January 15, 2014 btw, I did not want to insinuate that I believe the street grade of Elm St is 3.15 degrees. I only provided material the WC used to further advance their falsification of the true story. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now