Chris Davidson Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 Just ask for an electronic primer. You obviously haven't a clue. So you see, you haven't been ignored, you just don't understand the response. One more time, pull out your stopwatch boys and girls. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CFdpSs8Bt4f-GVJOCOl2wDXdpu-uNjQX/view?usp=sharing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 6 hours ago, Chris Davidson said: The span of 28.5ft (distance from POSITION A to Station# 250.0) with an elevation change of 1ft equals a 2 degree slope. This will help(mathematically) in the exacting of the listed .56ft lead bullet height on CE560. The three common entries used to complete the feat: 3.27ft 3.13degrees 10.2ft The more exact distance would be 10.2351ft 10.2351/3.27 = 3.13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 10 hours ago, Chris Davidson said: The three common entries used to complete the feat: 3.27ft 3.13degrees 10.2ft The more exact distance would be 10.2351ft 10.2351/3.27 = 3.13 3.13deg - 2 deg = 1.13deg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 Use this link to help decipher survey z207: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22692-swan-song-math-rules/?do=findComment&comment=330706 The 3.27ft vertical elevation used in CE884 for JFK's height converts to 1deg. There was a 1.13deg difference between POSITION A and Station 250.0 Converting that difference (in terms of elevation) : 3.27 x 1.13 = 3.695ft 3.695ft - 3.27ft = .425ft difference If this answer sounds familiar, it should: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 If you look at these two entries in the z207 decipher link: 3.27FT/60MIN = .0545 vert ft. per min 1ft vertical/18.3ft horizontal (ElmSt slope) = .0546vertical ft /1ft horizontal There is one more entry needed to connect the common ratio among them: 1frame/18.3frames = .0546 seconds per frame Slick how that works. P.S. 3.276/60 = .0546 exactly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted February 26, 2018 Share Posted February 26, 2018 Ergo, we do not get a film speed between 16 and 18 feet per second... but an impossible 18.3 feet per second... what a coincidence... well done Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 A few posts back, I mentioned how there were a few pieces to getting us the CE560 (.56ft) bullet lead height input. We already have .425ft of it. Now that we realize a 1 to 1 ratio is in play, we can apply that to Frazier's entry of "bullet time to impact" (.085 sec) and "limo distance traveled" (1.4ft????) 1 zframe = .0546sec = .0546 vert ft. Frazier's .085sec / .0546 = 1.5567 zframes and 1.5567 horiz ft traveled. Frazier's .085 sec = .085 vert elev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 So the 2nd of 3 adjustments by the WC to arrive at a .56 elev (CE560) change gets us to: .425 + .085 = .51ft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 26, 2018 Author Share Posted February 26, 2018 And the last elev. adjustment, with no surprise comes from CE884, the BS entry for z161-z166: .05ft Three adjustments: .425 + .085 + .05 = .56ft = CE560 lead bullet height. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 27, 2018 Author Share Posted February 27, 2018 9 hours ago, David Josephs said: Ergo, we do not get a film speed between 16 and 18 feet per second... but an impossible 18.3 feet per second... what a coincidence... well done David, I take it you meant frames per sec, not feet? The 1 to 1 ratio applies to the anywhere from (10.2ft-10.24ft) span =.56ft = 6.7inch WC adjustment. 1.525frames per inch = 18.3frames per 12inches = 1second per 12inches or 1/1.525 = .655…inches per frame x 10.22 frames = 6.7… inches = CE560 My conversion using the z207 decipher below: 1/1.528 = .65445.. x 10.24 framest = 6.7 inches = CE560 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 27, 2018 Author Share Posted February 27, 2018 The acoustical closely aligns with the 10.22-10.24, a .02 frame span difference. z313 - (104.31frames)= 5.7 seconds = z208.69 From z207 -z208.69 = 1.69frames If you look at CE884 z207-z222 = 14.8ft per 15 frames (12.28mph) = .986666... ft per frame .98666... x 1.69 frames = 1.6674ft The 1 to 1 ratio of frames to horizontal ft would dictate a : 1.69ft - 1.6674...ft = .0225ft difference, which pretty much matches the 10.22-10.24 frame span difference. In terms of speed, instead of 12.28mph, an average of 12.44mph would give you the 1.69 frame duration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 27, 2018 Author Share Posted February 27, 2018 12 hours ago, Chris Davidson said: David, I take it you meant frames per sec, not feet? The 1 to 1 ratio applies to the anywhere from (10.2ft-10.24ft) span =.56ft = 6.7inch WC adjustment. 1.525frames per inch = 18.3frames per 12inches = 1second per 12inches or 1/1.525 = .655…inches per frame x 10.22 frames = 6.7… inches = CE560 My conversion using the z207 decipher below: 1/1.528 = .65445.. x 10.24 framest = 6.7 inches = CE560 You can match the above bolded equation to (10" vert. = 15.25ft horizontal) multiplying by a factor of 10: 15.25 frames = 10 inches This in keeping with the 1-1-1 ratio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 28, 2018 Author Share Posted February 28, 2018 15.25frames = 10 inches Multiply 10x once more, for a ratio of: 152.5 frames =100 inches= 8.333...ft This sets the total frame span that is utilized in CE884 313-161 = 152 frames Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted February 28, 2018 Share Posted February 28, 2018 Just a bunch of coincidences... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Davidson Posted February 28, 2018 Author Share Posted February 28, 2018 Others like to refer to them as simple mistakes. Here's the next one: The elevation change for the 152 frame span = 429.25 - 421.75 = 7.5ft 152.5 frames =100 inches = 8.333..ft What do you think the difference between these two elevations is? Might it be the 10" vert = 15.25 horizontal drop the WC forced you to eat from z161-z166. You know, they fed you d-g sh-t and told you it was prime rib. 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