The Most Important Error the FBI told the Warren Commission about the Rifle

[Robert Prudhomme]

bump

[Kenneth Drew]

Jon

Close, but not quite.

Let us say the scope is mounted offset by 1 inch to the left of the receiver, as is close to the way the scope is mounted on C2766. This places the line of sight 1 inch to the left of the centre of the barrel, as well as the path of the bullet.

If a target was placed a few inches out from the end of the barrel (muzzle) and the shooter aimed at the bullseye, the bullet is likely to impact the target 1 inch to the right of the bullseye.

If the same rifle is aimed at a target at 100 yards, and the bullet impacts the target again 1 inch to the right of the bullseye, this tells us the barrel and scope, although separated laterally by 1 inch, are perfectly parallel to each other, and the rifle will continue to impact bullets 1 inch to the right of the point of aim, out to infinity.

This is an option for sighting in a side mounted rifle scope, simply to align the scope parallel with the barrel. All the shooter needs to know is the distance from the centre of the scope to the centre of the barrel, and to aim this much to the left for each shot, regardless of the range he is shooting at.

But, judging from the results Frazier obtained, that is not how the scope on C2766 was sighted in at all. At 15 yards, the bullets are impacting 1 inch to the right of the point of aim. At 25 yards, they seem to be landing 1-2 inches to the right of the point of aim. At 100 yards, the bullets are impacting the target 3-4 inches to the right of the point of aim.

Do you see a progression here? What is happening is, the line of sight of the scope and the path of the bullet are on diverging courses, and the further out you go, the greater the spread will be. At 200 yards, this rifle would likely be impacting the target almost 8 inches to the right of the point of aim.

This is not a sign that Oswald was particularly knowledgeable about sighting in a scope, although I will give him a break here, as it is far more difficult to sight in a side mounted scope than a scope mounted in the typical fashion, above the receiver.

The normal method of sighting in a side mounted scope is either the "parallel" lines method I discussed above, or the method of having the line of sight and the path of the bullet on converging courses, and having the two cross each other some distance out from the rifle. Typically, a hunter with a rifle with a side mounted scope will sight this rifle in to be accurate, both vertical and horizontal, at 100 yards. If line of sight and bullet path are 1 inch apart at the rifle, they will be 1/2 inch apart at 50 yards and will cross each other's paths at 100 yards. Up to this point, the bullet is impacting to the right of the point of aim. Once the two paths cross, the bullet will begin impacting to the left of the target. At 200 yards, the bullet should impact 1 inch to the left of the point of aim on the target, and so on. This is the best method if a shooter is only shooting out to 200 yards, but for shooters making really long shots, the parallel method makes for one less calculation on a long shot and, as I said, the shooter merely needs to aim to the left of the target an amount equal to the distance between the centre of the barrel and the centre of the scope. It should be noted that the shooter is not restricted to have the paths cross at 100 yards, and can sight this crossing point in for any distance he chooses.

It should be noted that Frazier stated the main thing they were testing here was speed, and not accuracy, and that it is possible the spread of the bullets on the target can be accounted for by careless aiming. However this is not a fair assumption, as it must be remembered that the first shot of each test would already be in the chamber, and would not be a hurried shot. As the following shots seem to land in a fairly good group (if one can call a 3.5x5 inch circle at 100 yards a good group) these tests would seem to be a good indication of where the bullets were impacting the targets.

However, the large group this rifle was firing at 100 yards could be indicative of several other things. The WCC cartridges were loaded with 6.5mm bullets that were .264" in diameter. This is the diameter of 6.5mm bullets for the majority of 6.5mm rifles on the planet but, the 6.5mm Carcano is special. It has deeper rifling grooves and requires a bullet .268" in diameter in order to maximize accuracy. Much of the poor reputation the Carcano has received, over the years, has been due to shooters firing cartridges loaded with the smaller .264" bullets.

If the bullets fired at each target progressively impacted higher and more to the right with each shot, it is indicative of an entirely different problem. The Carcano had a wooden stock and, like many rifles, the barrel was designed to "float" in the stock. This means that stock and barrel touched each other at the breech (chamber), where they are fastened together, but for the rest of the length of the barrel there is a tiny gap between stock and barrel, with the barrel in the trough made in the stock.

Parts of the Southern States, especially Louisiana, can be very humid, and a rifle stock may be exposed to extremes of humidity, depending how and where the rifle is stored. If the wood of the stock is not properly sealed, it could absorb moisture and, when it dries out, the stock may warp, depending on the grain of the wood. I have had this happen to a couple of rifles, and this is one of the reasons rifle stocks made from synthetics have become so popular.

You may wonder how a warped stock could affect bullet impact on a target. Simply put, if the stock did warp and, in this case, the stock was pressing against the lower left portion of the barrel, the barrel is flexible enough that this pressure would cause the first bullet to go high and to the right. Also, the first shot would heat the barrel up and cause it to expand, ever so slightly. This would make the second shot go even higher and further to the right, and the heat it gave to the barrel would affect the third shot further. Etc, etc, etc. The only solution is to remove the barrel, find the high spot on the stock, sand it down, seal the wood and re-mount the barrel.

The other option is that C2766 was simply an old worn out rifle that was not that great a rifle, even on the day it was made, and that its barrel was worn out from many thousands of shots fired through it, and badly eroded from years of neglect and poor storage in a humid climate.

This is not a sign that Oswald was particularly knowledgeable about sighting in a scope, although I will give him a break here, Robert, I just started reading on this thread, because you recommended it. But I have a problem. The very first comment should have stated that this information is all hypothetical. The simplest way I can demonstrate that is with your sentence I quoted in bold. All this information is not a sign of anything regarding LHO because there is little or no doubt that LHO ever even saw that rifle. No evidence has ever been presented that he had any knowledge at all of that rifle. He never 'sighted' it in. So from that point, this information is in the format that "IF LHO HAD FIRED THE RIFLE ON 11/22/63 FROM THE SNIPER'S NEST, THIS IS SOME OF THE DIFFICULTIES HE WOULD HAVE ENCOUNTERED". Once everyone understand's that it is all hypothetical and didn't happen, but 'could be true', then it might be easier to read.

[Robert Prudhomme]

Jon

Close, but not quite.

Let us say the scope is mounted offset by 1 inch to the left of the receiver, as is close to the way the scope is mounted on C2766. This places the line of sight 1 inch to the left of the centre of the barrel, as well as the path of the bullet.

If a target was placed a few inches out from the end of the barrel (muzzle) and the shooter aimed at the bullseye, the bullet is likely to impact the target 1 inch to the right of the bullseye.

If the same rifle is aimed at a target at 100 yards, and the bullet impacts the target again 1 inch to the right of the bullseye, this tells us the barrel and scope, although separated laterally by 1 inch, are perfectly parallel to each other, and the rifle will continue to impact bullets 1 inch to the right of the point of aim, out to infinity.

This is an option for sighting in a side mounted rifle scope, simply to align the scope parallel with the barrel. All the shooter needs to know is the distance from the centre of the scope to the centre of the barrel, and to aim this much to the left for each shot, regardless of the range he is shooting at.

But, judging from the results Frazier obtained, that is not how the scope on C2766 was sighted in at all. At 15 yards, the bullets are impacting 1 inch to the right of the point of aim. At 25 yards, they seem to be landing 1-2 inches to the right of the point of aim. At 100 yards, the bullets are impacting the target 3-4 inches to the right of the point of aim.

Do you see a progression here? What is happening is, the line of sight of the scope and the path of the bullet are on diverging courses, and the further out you go, the greater the spread will be. At 200 yards, this rifle would likely be impacting the target almost 8 inches to the right of the point of aim.

This is not a sign that Oswald was particularly knowledgeable about sighting in a scope, although I will give him a break here, as it is far more difficult to sight in a side mounted scope than a scope mounted in the typical fashion, above the receiver.

The normal method of sighting in a side mounted scope is either the "parallel" lines method I discussed above, or the method of having the line of sight and the path of the bullet on converging courses, and having the two cross each other some distance out from the rifle. Typically, a hunter with a rifle with a side mounted scope will sight this rifle in to be accurate, both vertical and horizontal, at 100 yards. If line of sight and bullet path are 1 inch apart at the rifle, they will be 1/2 inch apart at 50 yards and will cross each other's paths at 100 yards. Up to this point, the bullet is impacting to the right of the point of aim. Once the two paths cross, the bullet will begin impacting to the left of the target. At 200 yards, the bullet should impact 1 inch to the left of the point of aim on the target, and so on. This is the best method if a shooter is only shooting out to 200 yards, but for shooters making really long shots, the parallel method makes for one less calculation on a long shot and, as I said, the shooter merely needs to aim to the left of the target an amount equal to the distance between the centre of the barrel and the centre of the scope. It should be noted that the shooter is not restricted to have the paths cross at 100 yards, and can sight this crossing point in for any distance he chooses.

It should be noted that Frazier stated the main thing they were testing here was speed, and not accuracy, and that it is possible the spread of the bullets on the target can be accounted for by careless aiming. However this is not a fair assumption, as it must be remembered that the first shot of each test would already be in the chamber, and would not be a hurried shot. As the following shots seem to land in a fairly good group (if one can call a 3.5x5 inch circle at 100 yards a good group) these tests would seem to be a good indication of where the bullets were impacting the targets.

However, the large group this rifle was firing at 100 yards could be indicative of several other things. The WCC cartridges were loaded with 6.5mm bullets that were .264" in diameter. This is the diameter of 6.5mm bullets for the majority of 6.5mm rifles on the planet but, the 6.5mm Carcano is special. It has deeper rifling grooves and requires a bullet .268" in diameter in order to maximize accuracy. Much of the poor reputation the Carcano has received, over the years, has been due to shooters firing cartridges loaded with the smaller .264" bullets.

If the bullets fired at each target progressively impacted higher and more to the right with each shot, it is indicative of an entirely different problem. The Carcano had a wooden stock and, like many rifles, the barrel was designed to "float" in the stock. This means that stock and barrel touched each other at the breech (chamber), where they are fastened together, but for the rest of the length of the barrel there is a tiny gap between stock and barrel, with the barrel in the trough made in the stock.

Parts of the Southern States, especially Louisiana, can be very humid, and a rifle stock may be exposed to extremes of humidity, depending how and where the rifle is stored. If the wood of the stock is not properly sealed, it could absorb moisture and, when it dries out, the stock may warp, depending on the grain of the wood. I have had this happen to a couple of rifles, and this is one of the reasons rifle stocks made from synthetics have become so popular.

You may wonder how a warped stock could affect bullet impact on a target. Simply put, if the stock did warp and, in this case, the stock was pressing against the lower left portion of the barrel, the barrel is flexible enough that this pressure would cause the first bullet to go high and to the right. Also, the first shot would heat the barrel up and cause it to expand, ever so slightly. This would make the second shot go even higher and further to the right, and the heat it gave to the barrel would affect the third shot further. Etc, etc, etc. The only solution is to remove the barrel, find the high spot on the stock, sand it down, seal the wood and re-mount the barrel.

The other option is that C2766 was simply an old worn out rifle that was not that great a rifle, even on the day it was made, and that its barrel was worn out from many thousands of shots fired through it, and badly eroded from years of neglect and poor storage in a humid climate.

This is not a sign that Oswald was particularly knowledgeable about sighting in a scope, although I will give him a break here, Robert, I just started reading on this thread, because you recommended it. But I have a problem. The very first comment should have stated that this information is all hypothetical. The simplest way I can demonstrate that is with your sentence I quoted in bold. All this information is not a sign of anything regarding LHO because there is little or no doubt that LHO ever even saw that rifle. No evidence has ever been presented that he had any knowledge at all of that rifle. He never 'sighted' it in. So from that point, this information is in the format that "IF LHO HAD FIRED THE RIFLE ON 11/22/63 FROM THE SNIPER'S NEST, THIS IS SOME OF THE DIFFICULTIES HE WOULD HAVE ENCOUNTERED". Once everyone understand's that it is all hypothetical and didn't happen, but 'could be true', then it might be easier to read.

Good point, Ken. Thanks for pointing that out.

[Robert Prudhomme]

bump

[Gary Murr]

One should also be aware in reading this bumped thread that the WCC did not make 6.5mm Carcano ammunition that was "loaded with...bullets that were .264" in diameter." As I believe I indicated elsewhere in a thread on this forum, the 6.5mm Carcano ammunition manufactured by the WCC, and in particular the bullet component, was constructed utilizing specifications from Italian ballistic drawings/schematics supplied to Western by the U. S. Army Ordnance Department, diagrams acquired by the army as part of the massive quantities of "paperwork" confiscated by Allied forces during their liberation of Europe in 1944, 1945. I possess 60 rounds of this ammunition, from three different lot numbers, and the average bullet diameter size is just slightly over .2677".

[Robert Prudhomme]

One should also be aware in reading this bumped thread that the WCC did not make 6.5mm Carcano ammunition that was "loaded with...bullets that were .264" in diameter." As I believe I indicated elsewhere in a thread on this forum, the 6.5mm Carcano ammunition manufactured by the WCC, and in particular the bullet component, was constructed utilizing specifications from Italian ballistic drawings/schematics supplied to Western by the U. S. Army Ordnance Department, diagrams acquired by the army as part of the massive quantities of "paperwork" confiscated by Allied forces during their liberation of Europe in 1944, 1945. I possess 60 rounds of this ammunition, from three different lot numbers, and the average bullet diameter size is just slightly over .2677".

Following the assassination, SA Robert A. Frazier of the FBI had in his possession CE399, a 6.5mm Carcano bullet made by the Western Cartridge Co., plus the unfired 6.5mm Carcano cartridge found in C2766, also made by the Western Cartridge Co. On top of this, the FBI also purchased several boxes of WCC 6.5mm Carcano cartridges.

As part of his testimony to the WC, Frazier stated the dimensions of these WCC 6.5mm Carcano bullets that he had measured in his laboratory.

What diameter do you think he found the WCC bullets to be, and do you believe his measuring was accurate?

[Robert Prudhomme]

Gary Murr, on 30 Jun 2015 - 10:07 AM, said:

One should also be aware in reading this bumped thread that the WCC did not make 6.5mm Carcano ammunition that was "loaded with...bullets that were .264" in diameter." As I believe I indicated elsewhere in a thread on this forum, the 6.5mm Carcano ammunition manufactured by the WCC, and in particular the bullet component, was constructed utilizing specifications from Italian ballistic drawings/schematics supplied to Western by the U. S. Army Ordnance Department, diagrams acquired by the army as part of the massive quantities of "paperwork" confiscated by Allied forces during their liberation of Europe in 1944, 1945. I possess 60 rounds of this ammunition, from three different lot numbers, and the average bullet diameter size is just slightly over .2677".

Following the assassination, SA Robert A. Frazier of the FBI had in his possession CE399, a 6.5mm Carcano bullet made by the Western Cartridge Co., plus the unfired 6.5mm Carcano cartridge found in C2766, also made by the Western Cartridge Co. On top of this, the FBI also purchased several boxes of WCC 6.5mm Carcano cartridges.

As part of his testimony to the WC, Frazier stated the dimensions of these WCC 6.5mm Carcano bullets that he had measured in his laboratory.

What diameter do you think he found the WCC bullets to be, and do you believe his measuring was accurate?

------------------------------------------bumped and awaiting a response---------------------------------------------

[Glenn Nall]

the main problem i have with this illustration is that you made Lee Harvey Oswald's Mannlicher Carcano rifle that he purchased with his own hard-earned money from toting heavy school books pink.

[Robert Prudhomme]

I'm just thrilled that you were able to get so much from this thread.

[Glenn Nall]

yes, it seems to me that his rifle would be depicted in more of a Russian Red, maybe... or a Fascist Fucsia ... oh wait - i get it - "Pinko" Commie F** like Archie pointed out. That's why you chose pink...?

cool.

i hope you know i was kidding.

[Robert Prudhomme]

bump

[Robert Prudhomme]

One should also be aware in reading this bumped thread that the WCC did not make 6.5mm Carcano ammunition that was "loaded with...bullets that were .264" in diameter." As I believe I indicated elsewhere in a thread on this forum, the 6.5mm Carcano ammunition manufactured by the WCC, and in particular the bullet component, was constructed utilizing specifications from Italian ballistic drawings/schematics supplied to Western by the U. S. Army Ordnance Department, diagrams acquired by the army as part of the massive quantities of "paperwork" confiscated by Allied forces during their liberation of Europe in 1944, 1945. I possess 60 rounds of this ammunition, from three different lot numbers, and the average bullet diameter size is just slightly over .2677".

Following the assassination, SA Robert A. Frazier of the FBI had in his possession CE399, a 6.5mm Carcano bullet made by the Western Cartridge Co., plus the unfired 6.5mm Carcano cartridge found in C2766, also made by the Western Cartridge Co. On top of this, the FBI also purchased several boxes of WCC 6.5mm Carcano cartridges.

As part of his testimony to the WC, Frazier stated the dimensions of these WCC 6.5mm Carcano bullets that he had measured in his laboratory.

What diameter do you think he found the WCC bullets to be, and do you believe his measuring was accurate?

bump

[Glenn Nall]

along these lines but not exactly, i've always heard, and believe it's treated as a given, that there were THREE EMPTY shells found on the floor and ONE full round found in the breach of the MC (after Fritz accidentally ejected it when working the bolt at the scene - i'm always in awe of such "Fife-like" professionalism).

an article i came across shows two photos of the shells on the floor and the author points out what is clearly a loaded round stuck between the wall and the floor - he says he once thought it was an artifact of the floor making the shell appear to be loaded — he thereafter found with clearer pics (from Bonner who used a better camera than the DPD) that the one is indeed a loaded bullet.

what has been "decided" by way of some consensus, anyway? the story is three empties, right?

[EDIT] - I added a closeup of the bullet from the 6th floor Museum for length comparison only - regardless, this doesn't look like a piece of lint to me - the reflection of this "anomaly" is too much like that of the cylindrical shape of a bullet. and the author of this article states he looked at photos Bonner took that were of great quality AFTER he had decided that it was a piece of the floor.

man, i dunno - sure looks like a bullet to me...

Edited July 17, 2015 by Glenn Nall

[Robert Prudhomme]

I have seen an extreme close up of this "loaded" cartridge. What appears to be a bullet is something else entirely, perhaps a bit of lint.

[David Josephs]

I have a question for you Bob...

I recently realized that the Klein's order was initially for the M91TS

All the ads for C20-T750 says it has an Adjustable Rear Sight

Do you agree that the original M91TS order was NOT for the 91/38 TS rifle which has the fixed sights but for the 91TS to satisfy orders for an ad that begins running in March 1962?

Which basically means they advertised a rifle for which the records do not offer any evidence they ever received 91TS rifles to fulfill them.

The rifle found was the 91/38 FC... so not only did they replace the 91TS rifles with a larger rifle but they swap fixed sights for adjustable... Wouldn't that bother anyone ordering C20-T750 scoped?

Have you ever heard of anyone having a 91/38FC rifle with any one of the other 99 serial numbers offered via Klein's?

Is it not strange that a company would advertise a rifle for a year and either not sell a single one or is it more strange that a an order for the rifle to be advertised starting in March would be changed to Berreta or Terni made M91/38 with no designation regarding TS or FC?

In April 1963 the same ad, same Item # C20-T750 is now for a 40" 7lb Rear open sight rifle - the M91/38FC... Do we know if Kleins sold a single FC rifle between Feb 23 and Nov 23?

Thanks Bob...

DJ