Robert Prudhomme Posted February 3, 2015 Author Share Posted February 3, 2015 Hi Chris In regards to the difference in rifle measurements, the long rifles had longer butts on their stocks than did the carbines and short rifles. I was looking at the trajectory diagram you posted that Eisenberg drew and something occurred to me. As the follow up car sat much higher off the ground than did the Lincoln limo, and as the SS agents were standing on the sides of this car, and as the follow up car was almost on top of the limo, how clear of a shot would LHO have had from the 6th floor SE window? Is this why a follow up car was not included in the reenactments? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcolm Ward Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Hi Chris In regards to the difference in rifle measurements, the long rifles had longer butts on their stocks than did the carbines and short rifles. I was looking at the trajectory diagram you posted that Eisenberg drew and something occurred to me. As the follow up car sat much higher off the ground than did the Lincoln limo, and as the SS agents were standing on the sides of this car, and as the follow up car was almost on top of the limo, how clear of a shot would LHO have had from the 6th floor SE window? Is this why a follow up car was not included in the reenactments? This has been raised before Bob.But I agree that you have a point. When when you start looking at this video - you see that the SS Limo is pretty much bumper to bumper with JFK Limo. Look at how that SS Limo is filled with guys, even in the middle of the seats!! (watch the clip when the SS & JFK's Limos are going down Houston - you can see how filled up that SS Limo is!!!! Lets bottomline this - There's a reason that SS Limo isnt in any of the re-enactments: - The SS Limo was taller then JFK's Limo - The SS Limo was bumper to bumber with JFK's Limo - The SS Limo was filled with SS Agents on the running boards & IN THE MIDDLE Seats - Measure the running board to the ground - then find out the height of all the different Secret Service Agents! * Now Oswald shooting through tree branches & we have all seen the 1964 scoped headshot or even the "magic bullet" back shot - That SS Limo are in the way! Look at that 1964 scoped Headshot/Magic Bullet shot & compare that to how that SS Limo was packed with guys! Guys on the sides, guys in the middle seats, guys in the front & back seats! I think it would be really interesting in a 2013 re-enactment to see a SS Limo behind JFK's Limo & fill that SS Limo the sameway it was in 1963! I bet one of the running board or middle seat guys would have gotten shot in the head! Source: http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php?topic=6848.0;wap2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted February 4, 2015 Author Share Posted February 4, 2015 (edited) Hi Malcolm If we think about this a little, we should be able to solve this problem with mathematics. We know the head shot at z313 was at a range of 88 yards. All we need to know is either the precise altitude from street level to the sill of the 6th floor window or the distance from the SE corner of the TSBD to the limo position at z313. With either measurement, we can use either B² = C² - A² or A² = C² - B² to give us all the dimensions of a right angle triangle, although it must also be taken into consideration that Elm St descends to the Triple Underpass on a 3% slope. Anyways, once we have this drawn out, we simply need to know what elevation JFK's head was at in the z313 position (as you say, he was leaned over) and the elevation of the highest point of the follow up car and its occupants (not forgetting it was slightly uphill on a 3% slope). After that, it should be a simple exercise in intervisibility. We should also determine the lateral angle from the centre line of the limo to the SE corner of the TSBD, and use this to determine just what part of the follow up car would have been in line with the SE corner and JFK. Where is Chris when you need him? Edited February 4, 2015 by Robert Prudhomme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Robert, Mr. SPECTER. What was the height of President Kennedy? Mr. KELLEY. He was 72 1/2 inches. Mr. SPECTER. And were you present when a man was placed in the same position in the Secret Service followup car as that in which President Kennedy sat in the Presidential car when the tests were simulated on May 24th of this year? Mr. KELLEY. I was. Mr. SPECTER. Do you know the name of that individual? Mr. KELLEY. He was an FBI agent by the name of James W. Anderton. Mr. SPECTER. And what was the height of Mr. Anderton? Mr. KELLEY. He was 72 1/2 inches. Mr. SPECTER. Do you know the height of Governor Connally? Mr. KELLEY. Governor Connally was 6 foot 4. Mr. SPECTER. Was that the height of the Governor himself or the Governor's stand-in? Mr. KELLEY. It was my understanding that Governor Connally was--6 foot 2, I guess. The Governor's stand-in, Mr. Doyle Williams, was 6 foot 4. Mr. SPECTER. Were you present when those two individuals were seated in the Secret Service followup car? Mr. KELLEY. Yes, sir. Mr. SPECTER. And what adjustment was made, if any, so that the relative positions of those two men were the same as the positioning of President Kennedy and Governor Connally on November 22, 1963? Mr. KELLEY. The officials at Hess Eisenhardt, who have the original plans of the President's car, conducted a test to ascertain how high from the ground a person 72 1/2 inches would be seated in this car before its modification. And 132 it was ascertained that the person would be 52.78 inches from the ground--that is, taking into consideration the flexion of the tires, the flexion of the cushions that were on the car at the time. Mr. SPECTER. When you say 52.78 inches, which individual would that be? Mr. KELLEY. That would be the President. Mr. SPECTER. And what part of his body? Mr. KELLEY. The top of the head would be 52.78 inches from the ground. chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Lloyd Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Mr. KELLEY. It was my understanding that Governor Connally was--6 foot 2, I guess. The Governor's stand-in, Mr. Doyle Williams, was 6 foot 4. So, in the re-enactment, the guy sitting in JBC's seat was 2" higher than JBC actually was? Were the same 2 people used in CE 903? http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0055b.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted February 5, 2015 Author Share Posted February 5, 2015 Hi Chris That doesn't sound very high for the top of the President's head but, looking again at photos of the limo, it definitely was a bit of a low rider; much closer to the ground than a 1955 Cadillac limo. Did you already tell us how much they had to adjust the location of the JFK back shot on the stand in for JFK, as he was riding in the much higher Cadillac limo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted February 5, 2015 Author Share Posted February 5, 2015 What was the elevation of the window sill of the 6th floor window above the pavement of Elm St.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Lloyd Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 60.7' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) 60.7' That would account for the angle of entrance of the President's back wound as being estimated as being 45/60 degrees downwards. Edited February 5, 2015 by Ray Mitcham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Lloyd Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 A bit more here in CD 298... https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10699&relPageId=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 60.7' Ian, Add .5ft for the curb = 61.2ft Street elevation 429.7 6th floor ledge 490.9 chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted February 5, 2015 Author Share Posted February 5, 2015 Okay, the other thing is the 3% downhill grade of Elm St. As I said, a 3% grade means a drop in elevation of 1 foot vertically for every 33 feet forward. If the shot at z313 was 88 yards, or 265 feet, and the sniper was 61.2 feet above the street, C² - A² = B² should give us a horizontal distance of 258 feet. Dividing 258 by 33 gives us a vertical drop of 7.8 feet, IF Elm St. maintained a 3% downhill grade for all 258 feet. What was the street elevation at z313 again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Elm St slope was 3.13 degrees = 5.46% street grade. This equals a 1ft vertical to 18.3 ft horizontal ratio. The TSBD was at Station# 2+50.0 Z313 was determined to be at Station# 4+65.3 A difference of 215.3ft 215.3/18.3 = a vertical difference/drop of 11.76ft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted February 5, 2015 Author Share Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) Thanks, Chris. You are a great help to everyone. Okay, so if there was a difference in elevation from the SE corner of the TSBD to the z313 position of 11.76 feet, this would mean the total difference in elevation from the window sill of the 6th floor to the z313 position would be 72.96 feet. If the range of the shot at z313 was indeed 265 feet, this would then make a right angle triangle with an altitude of 72.96 feet, and a hypotenuse of 265 feet. To find the base of this triangle, which, as you say, was determined to be 215.3 feet, we can once again use C² - A² = B². 265² - 72.96² = B² 70225 - 5323 = 64902 The square root of 64902 is, by my calculator, 254.76. 254.76 - 215.3 = 39.46 Unless I have made a mistake somewhere, and I would appreciate it if anyone would point it out, the distance the WC determined of 215.3 feet is out by 39.46 feet, and the head shot occurred further down Elm St. than the z313 position. Is this what you have been trying to show us, Chris? P.S. Thanks for pointing out that Elm St. was 3.13° (5.46% grade), and not a 3% slope. I recall walking up it to the TSBD, and it seemed steeper to me than a 3% slope. Edited February 5, 2015 by Robert Prudhomme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 5, 2015 Share Posted February 5, 2015 Robert, The 215.3ft would be the physical location on Elm St. to Z313, not from the base of the TSBD which forms the right triangle. I wanted you to become familiar with the straight line street distance and vert/horiz ratio first. The 52.78 inches "JFK head above ground" = 4.39ft. Previously, I posted testimony from Robert Frasier I believe, who said they used an approx 2ft rise above the window sill as the rifle end height. The equation is going to look something like this: 60.7ft sill + .5ft curb + 11.76ft ElmSt slope = 72.96ft 72.96ft - 4.39ft = 68.57ft 68.57ft + 2 ft = 70.57ft The actual Z313 survey has this side at 70.25ft A difference of 3.84 inches. 265.3ft hypotenuse, 70.57ft side and 255.74ft side = right triangle. 265.26ft """"""" 70.25ft """" and 255.8ft """ = Z313 survey. 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