Thomas H. Purvis Posted February 16, 2006 Share Posted February 16, 2006 I am also greatly intrigued by Tom Purvis's claim about the yellow marks on the curb along the procession route which is the first I had heard of them and which would seem to mark off a killing zone as he legitimately, in my view, claims. To me, this is startling and potentially significant information. Does anybody else have any views about the yellow marks on the curb as viewable in the Zapruder film? Bill Miller, where are you? Bill posted a couple of years ago on Lancer that he talked to Dallas cab drivers about the yellow stripes. He was told that there were such yellow stripes elsewhere in Dallas, that the idea dated back to the late 1950s, and that the purpose was to let drivers know, mainly at night when visibility was poor, that the road was turning. Sounds good to me, Except! 1. Mr. West, who was the County Surveyor was unaware of what these marks were for. 2. The first yellow mark is not painted onto the curb until approximately five-feet prior to where impact of the Z313 shot occurred. This leaves approximately the first 210 feet of Elm St. with none of these yellow stripes painted onto the curb, and this first 210 foot long stretch has as much "curve" as does that section through which the yellow marks are painted on. 3. Guess that those drivers in the far right hand lane were supposed to look all the way across to their left and utilized the left hand side painted markers as their reference for the road turning, as there were absolutely none of these yellow stripes painted onto the curb of Elm St. on the Zapruder/TSDB side. 4. Mr. West conducted survey work throughout Dealy Plaza, and this is the absolute ONLY location which has such items painted onto the street. It is of course recognized that most of the other work was associated with streets which ran generally straight however. The impact point for Z313 plats approximately 5-feet past the first yellow mark on the curb. The impact point of "15-feet" from Mr. James Altgens plats approximately 5-feet from the second yellow mark on the curb. The third yellow mark is approximately 45 feet (center to center) past the second yellow mark. At this time, Clint Hill was fully on the back of the Presidential Limo, and the shooter had an additional/the last round chambered. Certainly coincidential in my shooting experiences! And, in event that there is any truth/fact to the rumor that Jean Hill/or Mary Moorman got some of the yellow paint on their shoes from the mark just prior to the Z313 shot, then I suppose that we would have to assume that the city painted these marks that night, or at minimal late the evening of 11/21/63. P.S. For those who are unaware of it, LHO had received employment offering through the Employment Office, for a position working for the City Street Crews, however, when found that he had already secured employment, this was dropped. Who knows? They could have been some form of RR Crossing warning. But as one who has participated in real live fire/non-training exercises, the yellow stripes certainly make nice range markers. Al: I find that if I just don't read Purvis- or any LNer- I enjoy this forum far more. You can't employ logic with a person so brainwashed, (imho). Dawn The entire world awaits you and the Garrison suckers to give us something of relevance. Exactly when was it that we could expect it, I am, after all getting quite up in years and would like to "Peer Review" it while still firmly planted on terra firma. Actually, it is inconceiveable to me as to why anyone would fall for the "acoustics studies" when so many valid earwitnesses have stated in effect: Bang--------------------------------Bang----Bang!... I do seem to recall that the consensus of witnesses was: BANG-------------------------------Bang--Bang! I don't think there was a concensus at all as to how long there was between shots, only that the second two were more closely spaced than the first two. Either of the two "timings" above fit that bill.It's my humble hypothesis that the first shot was taken by someone who "jumped the gun," so to speak, that is, fired before he was supposed to. He would be someone who had the time to stash the gun even given the Marrion Baker timeline, and clearly had time to leave the floor without being seen - in fact, he testified to that very thing, as did others, tho' he's never been connected to the shooting before. As to motive, it could have been as simple as the one most often ascribed to Oswald. First off, it is my opinion that the motive was-----------------------MONEY! Secondly, you are apparently quite correct in the "jump the gun", which would indicate a variation from the plan, in event the yellow stripes are in fact some form of referenc for "range markers". Quite coincidental that the second shot/aka Z313 headshot was only some 5-feet past the first of these yellow markers, with a 5.8 to 5.9 second wait between shots. The "jump the gun" appears to be the lack of experience factor which caused the shooter to let go with the first shot as the head of JFK came from under/behind the tree limbs. However, even at this close range, it should have been a "gimme" as the distance from the ledge of the sixth floor window, to the position on Elm St. was only between 175 to 185 feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted February 16, 2006 Share Posted February 16, 2006 Al: I find that if I just don't read Purvis- or any LNer- I enjoy this forum far more. You can't employ logic with a person so brainwashed, (imho). Dawn Hi Dawn I can understand your attitude although I find I must commend Mr. Purvis for the best posts that I have seen from him in this forum. While I am not a person who uses guns or rifles, his point that a marksman aiming from behind, as the Presidential motorcade proceeded away from the TSBD, would have the best shot, makes eminent sense, the target being relatively more stationary than shooting from the side at a moving motorcade, where you would have to aim ahead of the targets in a moving limousine where the shot(s) would be many fold more difficult. I am also greatly intrigued by Tom Purvis's claim about the yellow marks on the curb along the procession route which is the first I had heard of them and which would seem to mark off a killing zone as he legitimately, in my view, claims. To me, this is startling and potentially significant information. Does anybody else have any views about the yellow marks on the curb as viewable in the Zapruder film? As posted by Lee Forman, in his post of Feb 10 2006, 06:50 PM (thanks, Lee!), I show below the URL for one of the Zapruder frames (z357) showing one of the yellow stripes. Chris http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z357.jpg That is the second yellow stripe which is down, across the street from, the steps/walkway on which Mr. Hudson was standing. The person to the left, standing on the curb is Mr. James Altgens who fully observed the strike of the third/last/final shot. There is one additional yellow stripe which is approximately 45 feet (center to center) farther down the street. The last yellow stripe is approximately 22 feet (center to center) before reaching the concrete curb inlet cover. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. HUDSON - Yes; so right along about even with these steps, pretty close to even with this here, the last shot was fired - somewhere right along in there ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. ALTGENS - This would put me at approximately this area here, which would be about 15 feet from me at the time he was shot in the head--about 15 feet from the car on the west side of the car--on the side that Mrs. Kennedy was riding in the car. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. HUDSON I happened to be looking right at him when that bullet hit him - the second shot. Mr. LIEBELER - That was when the bullet hit him in the head; is that correct? Mr. HUDSON - Yes; it looked like it ht him somewhere along about a little bit behind the ear and a little bit above the ear. Mr. LIEBELER - On the right-hand side or the left-hand side? Mr. HUDSON - Right hand. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SS Agent Glenn Bennett: http://jfkassassination.net/russ/exhibits/ce2112.htm "a second shot followed immediately and hit the right rear high of the bosses head" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Governor CONNALLY: So I merely doubled up, and then turned to my right again and began to--I just sat there, and Mrs. Connally pulled me over to her lap. She was sitting, of course, on the jump seat, so I reclined with my head in her lap, conscious all the time, and with my eyes open; and then, of course, the third shot sounded, and I heard the shot very clearly. I heard it hit him. I heard the shot hit something, and I assumed again--it never entered my mind that it ever hit anybody but the President. I heard it hit. It was a very loud noise, just that audible, very clear. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rest assured, there is absolutely nothing complicated as regards the sequencing of the three shots fired in Dealy Plaza on 11/22/63 The only items of complication are how the WC made an entire shot disappear, and of course the WHY? of such actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted February 16, 2006 Share Posted February 16, 2006 (edited) Tom, Knowing nothing about shooting, I don't understand how these yellow stripes were used if they were range markers as you say. Can you briefly explain their use (not just how many feet there were from here to there, which doesn't explain anything)? If you've already done so, I missed it. What I'm wondering, in my shooting ignorance, is how could a shooter aiming at his target pay any attention to stripes on the street? Would there be spotters who are looking at the stripes while shooters are aiming at the target, and the spotters tell the shooters when to fire based on the stripes? You have argued there was only one assassin, so I assume you think there was no spotter. So there must be some other explanation in your mind for use of the stripes than what my questions above suggest. So I'm at a loss as to what these stripes are supposed to mean. Ron Edited February 16, 2006 by Ron Ecker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Gratz Posted February 16, 2006 Share Posted February 16, 2006 Anyone who would shoot a defenseless man in the back has a yellow stripe running down his own back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted February 16, 2006 Share Posted February 16, 2006 The last/third/final shot which occurred "down by the steps" "15 feet in front of" Mr. Altgens, is the shot responsible for the edge of hairline entry into the back of the scalp of JFK, as well as the EOP entry hole through the skull.Since the shot obviously did not strike JFK and thus "tunnel" upwards to strike the EOP, then there is left only the aspect that the head of JFK was not in the vertical position at time of impact. In fact, the strike occurred with JFK bent well forward at the waist, with his head turned almost fully to the right and head somewhat drooped. And again, I will repeat, that this shot penetrated the coat of JFK at the junction where the coat collar turn down meets the regular coat. Because of the physical position of JFK as well as the angular nature of the strike of the bullet, the bullet did not penetrate the shirt which was held firmly in place around the neck by it's having been buttoned. Rest assured that it is not coincidence that there is a hole, at this location on the coat of JFK, that aligns perfectly with the edge of the hairline entry wound into the scalp at the base of JFK's neck. And, you can throw out the window any and all testimony that this is where some "comparison sample" was taken. Because a large section of the skull had already been separated and was laying over on the right hand side of the skull at the time of impact of the third/last/final shot, when the bullet entered at the base of the skull/eop area, it managed to send numerous fractures running up and into various directions. Which when these fractures encountered the existing area of missing skull, the fractures ceased, yet nevertheless caused this area of the skull in the EOP vicinity to fracture and fragment into numerous pieces. After passing through the skull and brain of JFK, the bullet continued on it's downward path, directly in to right rear shoulder of JBC who was by then laying across the jump seats, with his shoulder and back in the almost horizontal position, and thus exposing his back to this exiting bullet. Thereafter, the bullet passed through the chest of JBC, exited the chest and went into the left leg/thigh. And, although not likely that you are ready and or willing to accept this. Thats all folks! No multiple assassins! No Body snatchers! Just three shots, two of which were to the head of JFK One of which has been made to completely disappear, thereby having the wounds that it created blamed on another bullet, while all factual evidence of the bullet and when it was fired have become lost. Politicians, not unlike Magicians, can make things disappear! Tom, I don't get this part of your theory. It appears you're saying that the bullet that entered the hairline exited out of the large skull defect. Is this correct? If so, then why was there not a second spray of brain mist? And if the bullet continued at a downwards angle to hit a nearly horizontal Connally in the back of his right armpit, why didn't the bullet continue on towards his heart? Instead of flattening its trajectory and REVERSING its right/left direction and heading downwards in his body toward his right nipple? And then changing angles again and basically pulling a 90 degree turn from its original trajectory to injure Connally's thigh? I don't think this trajectory makes much sense once one considers Connally's wounds. If you have any overhead drawings demonstrating how this might work, they might prove useful in demonstrating this trajectory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Lane Posted February 16, 2006 Share Posted February 16, 2006 Actually, it is inconceiveable to me as to why anyone would fall for the "acoustics studies" when so many valid earwitnesses have stated in effect: Bang--------------------------------Bang----Bang!... I do seem to recall that the consensus of witnesses was: BANG-------------------------------Bang--Bang! I don't think there was a concensus at all as to how long there was between shots, only that the second two were more closely spaced than the first two. Either of the two "timings" above fit that bill.It's my humble hypothesis that the first shot was taken by someone who "jumped the gun," so to speak, that is, fired before he was supposed to. He would be someone who had the time to stash the gun even given the Marrion Baker timeline, and clearly had time to leave the floor without being seen - in fact, he testified to that very thing, as did others, tho' he's never been connected to the shooting before. As to motive, it could have been as simple as the one most often ascribed to Oswald. First off, it is my opinion that the motive was-----------------------MONEY! Secondly, you are apparently quite correct in the "jump the gun", which would indicate a variation from the plan, in event the yellow stripes are in fact some form of referenc for "range markers". Quite coincidental that the second shot/aka Z313 headshot was only some 5-feet past the first of these yellow markers, with a 5.8 to 5.9 second wait between shots. The "jump the gun" appears to be the lack of experience factor which caused the shooter to let go with the first shot as the head of JFK came from under/behind the tree limbs. However, even at this close range, it should have been a "gimme" as the distance from the ledge of the sixth floor window, to the position on Elm St. was only between 175 to 185 feet. Nobody has ever ascribed Oswald's motivation to have been money. What anyone else's was ...? I wasn't commenting on that. I think the "lack of experience factor" plays well with this inasmuch as the shooter, while certainly old enough, saw virtually no active duty during WWII and had NO combat experience and in fact did not serve throughout the entire war as most men of the time (who survived) did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted February 16, 2006 Share Posted February 16, 2006 'Pat Speer' wrote: [...] Tom, I don't get this part of your theory. It appears you're saying that the bullet that entered the hairline exited out of the large skull defect. Is this correct? If so, then why was there not a second spray of brain mist? the 3rd shot was removed from the camera original Z-film. Alledged Zapruder camera original, Z-313 represents the 3rd and final shot, in Tom's scenario it's the 2nd shot, 3rd shot hit JC[? I think] there was NO first shot miss, the first shot hit Kennedy in the neck (as the initial FBI/SS and Time-LIFE recreations suggest) ...that how it goes? And if the bullet continued at a downwards angle to hit a nearly horizontal Connally in the back of his right armpit, why didn't the bullet continue on towards his heart? Instead of flattening its trajectory and REVERSING its right/left direction and heading downwards in his body toward his right nipple? And then changing angles again and basically pulling a 90 degree turn from its original trajectory to injure Connally's thigh? I don't think this trajectory makes much sense once one considers Connally's wounds. If you have any overhead drawings demonstrating how this might work, they might prove useful in demonstrating this trajectory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Lane Posted February 16, 2006 Share Posted February 16, 2006 That is the second yellow stripe which is down, across the street from, the steps/walkway on which Mr. Hudson was standing.The person to the left, standing on the curb is Mr. James Altgens who fully observed the strike of the third/last/final shot. There is one additional yellow stripe which is approximately 45 feet (center to center) farther down the street. The last yellow stripe is approximately 22 feet (center to center) before reaching the concrete curb inlet cover. See Z435. In it you will see two additional yellow stripes, from Z's perspective, on either side of the tree, one of them between the tree and the Ft Worth Turnpike sign. They are visible but not as clear in adjacent frames, but they do continue almost to - if not all the way to - the bridge.I didn't notice any before Z295 when it appears in front of Mary Moorman's left foot. From Z231 to Z292 there's not much curb showing at all; before that, I noticed no such stripes. If you posit a shooter from the TSBD, presumably SE 6th floor window, it almost seems as if these marks would be useless as that portion of the curb is almost in the line of sight of such a shooter. Perhaps not at the SW corner windows, but most likely from the SE window. I'll check it out when I'm downtown next. It might be helpful if you could email me an overhead view showing where the stripes are ...? The "range finders" down by the bridge seem totally useless to anyone in TSBD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted February 16, 2006 Share Posted February 16, 2006 Tom,Knowing nothing about shooting, I don't understand how these yellow stripes were used if they were range markers as you say. Can you briefly explain their use (not just how many feet there were from here to there, which doesn't explain anything)? If you've already done so, I missed it. What I'm wondering, in my shooting ignorance, is how could a shooter aiming at his target pay any attention to stripes on the street? Would there be spotters who are looking at the stripes while shooters are aiming at the target, and the spotters tell the shooters when to fire based on the stripes? You have argued there was only one assassin, so I assume you think there was no spotter. So there must be some other explanation in your mind for use of the stripes than what my questions above suggest. So I'm at a loss as to what these stripes are supposed to mean. Ron When one has a 3-foot long yellow mark on the curb which can be easily seen from the sixth floor window, a spotter would not be necessary. All that one would have to know is the approximate proper sight picture to take for each stripe, and since one is going to be looking directly towards the stripes, they would be seen as the limo approached them, as well as just after the limo passed them. They are also of considerable benefit if one is going to do all shooting through a scope, as they provide a ready reference point which can be easily found. 1. The centerline to centerline distance from one yellow mark to the next mark was approximately 45 feet. 2. Range markers can be any form of fixed object which the shooter can see, and for which some established distance (shooter to target) can be referenced to the actual ballistic flight of the bullet. 3. In normal military experience, such markers are normally placed at equidistant intervals which may be in 50 yards; 75 yards; 100 yards; 125 yards; etc; etc; etc. Due to the ballistic "arc" of a bullet throughout it's flight, one must compensate physically in the sighting of the rifle, for different ranges. In rifles with adjustable sights, a correction to the elevation of the rear sight can compensate for these differences. In rifles such as the 91/38 Carcano, which has fixed sights which can not be moved, this compensation for slight difference in elevation along the trajectory of the bullet flight, must be compensated for by taking a slightly different sight picture. IE: Aiming high, or aiming low on the target. In this regard, one must know the ranges to the target in order to compensate for the slight differences between direct/straight line of sight as opposed to the slightly parabolic arc of the rifle bullet. Range markers provide the basis for knowing the approximate given distance to a target, and thus provide the necessary information to a shooter as to whether his sight picture must be somewhat low, exactly on, or somewhat high, based on the specific characteristics of the weapon and bullet. The fixed sight of the 6.5mm 91/38 carcano was reportedly set for 200 meters. (Some claim 300, which was for the older models, however Richard Hobbs who is a well known expert, lists the 200 meter ZERO setting for the factory sights.) Therefore, at 200 meters (656 feet) the line-of-sight and the line-of-flight for the bullet should come directly together. For true accuracy information at shots of varying ranges/distance, having some reference point at which can be readily identified, and having knowledge of the exact rifle to target distance, is imperative for accurate shooting when attempting such as head shots. Range markers provide this reference, and by being able to see and identify the specific marker, one knows whether to compensate "High", "Low", or not at all in his sight picture/aiming based on the known range to his range marker, at which the target has arrived at. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rourke answered nothing. He kept walking, his eyes squinted against the glare from the water tower. He was waiting for it to shift -- just slightly -- because the nearer they could get to the fence the better their chances would be. The sniper -- if it were a sniper and he estimated that it was -- would have predetermined fields of fire and ranges. There would be range markers. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- My apology that all of the experts to date have not brought out the somewhat necessity for having some form of Range Markers for accuracy shooting, even at the short distances in Dealy Plaza. Most military training merely teaches to shoot for center of mass, that way the slight difference in sight picture as opposed to bullet impact point makes little difference as militarily, we prefer to wound the enemy. Thereby consuming resources in manpower and medical supplies for the enemy to have to take care of their wounded. Those who shoot to kill, (head strike shots) generally had well laid our their fields of fire, as well as having some reference point aka range markers to assist in determination of target range in order to compensate either with change in crosshair elevation on scopes, or adjustments to sight picture on manual sighting. In this regards, the spotter usually relays this information to the shooter. This of course is no guarantee that the yellow stripes located through the "kill zone" of Elm st. were in fact for this purpose. Just that it would have appeared quite obvious if one had survey stakes with various colored ribbons tied to them, whereas yellow paint on the curb is not that obvioius to most and quite simple to accomplish. And rest assured that LHO knew full well the necessity of range markers for close accuracy shooting. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now, for example, the Dealy Plaza Yellow Marks. The marks are 3-feet in length, and approximately 45 feet apart (centerline of mark to centerline of mark) Therefore, the distance from beginning of one mark, to end of another mark is approximately 48 feet. At 15mph, the Presidential limousine would have covered 79,200 feet per hour/1,320 feet per minute/22 feet per second. Minimum Operating time of the rifle was considered to be 2.2 to 2.3 seconds, which equates to a distance of 48.4 feet of distance covered for a 2.2 second rifle operating time and 50.6 feet of distance covered for a 2.3 second rifle operating time. Which certainly makes it appear as if these marks may have been laid out/measured in and established based on an approximate vehicle speed of 15 mph or so. And of course, any vehicle speed slower than this merely gave additional rifle operating time from one shot/range marker, to the next. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn at any time that he had been practicing with the rifle? Mrs. OSWALD. I think that he went once or twice. I didn't actually see him take the rifle, but I knew that he was practicing. Mr. RANKIN. Do you know where he practiced with the rifle? Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know where. I don't know the name of the place where this took place. But I think it was somewhere out of town. It seems to me a place called Lopfield. Mr. RANKIN. Would that be at the airport---Love Field? Mrs. OSWALD. Love Field. Mr. RANKIN. From what you observed about his having the rifle on the back porch, in the dark, could you tell whether or not he was trying to practice with the telescopic lens? 217 O--64--vol.I---3 Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. I asked him why. But this time he was preparing to go to Cuba. Mr. RANKIN. That was his explanation for practicing with the rifle? Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. He said that he would, go to Cuba. I told him I was not going with him---that I would stay here. Mr. RANKIN. On these occasions when he was practicing with the rifle, would they be three or four times a week in the evening, after the Fair Play for Cuba incident? Mrs. OSWALD. Almost every evening. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/21stCenturyS...al/message/2366 **NOTE** -- Many people have duplicated the conditions of the JFK assassination and proven that a good rifleman could make the same shots. Many conspiracy theorists point to some statement by an "expert" who claimed that nobody could fire an old Mannlicher Carcano that fast. Whoever made that statement was just full of crap. Two or three years ago at a shooting match in -- Ohio? -- the organizers recreated this scenario with a tower, moving target, and an old Mannlicher-Carcano with a cheap scope. Practically everyone who entered the match did just as well as Oswald and several did better. The top shooter was left-handed -- just like Oswald! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://personal.stevens.edu/~gliberat/carcano/emary.html SIGHTS: 6.5 mm 6.5 mm Carcanos were equiped with a wide variety of sights. Early model M91 series rifles had adjustable sights with a fixed battle zero sight. Most models of rifles made just before or during WWII had fixed sights. The exception to this was the M41 model. From a user standpoint the WWII era Carcano’s sights are the model of effectiveness and simplicity. The early model M91 version rifles with the fixed battle sight being at 300 meters was probably not the greatest decision but reflected the trend of that time. With this sight setting the rifles would have a maximum height of trajectory of approximately 15” – 17” at a range of 175 to 200 yards, depending on barrel length. I suspect more than one Austrian soldiers life was spared in WWI because someone shot over his head The Italians apparently realized that a 300-meter battle zero was a bit impractical and with the introduction of the M38 models went to a 200 meter battle zero. This zero results in a maximum height of trajectory of 5.5” – 6.5” at a range of approximately 100 yards, depending on barrel length. With this sight setting, by simply holding on the middle of the torso, it would have been hard to miss the target out to about 220 meters. The Carcano’s also used a unique sight picture. The proper sight picture for regulated sights on a Carcano is with the front sight in the very bottom of the rear sight groove. This is how the Italian army manuals instructed that the sights be used. Potentially, this would allow for two battle sight settings. The normal use as mentioned above would be a 200 meter zero. Using the Mauser sighting method, the front sight level with the rear sight, would result in a zero of 330 – 350 meters. This is about the maximum range practical for attempting to engage a target with iron sights. I contend with the Carcano the Italians had a very intelligent approach for a battle rifle. The fixed sights were basically fool proof. The Italians must have realized with the M38 models that nearly all small arms engagements occurred inside of 200 meters. The fixed sights with a 200 meter zero would have been fool proof for a soldier under stress, who was probably a poor judge of distance to begin with. The soldier would have had to do nothing but point and shoot at the middle of his enemy for ranges out to 220 – 230 meters. How much more simple and effective could it have been made. Following is a table of different models of rifles with all the information needed to properly set one up with the sights regulated for the military issue type load, approximately a 160 grain bullet at 2,100 to 2,250 fps depending on barrel length. The table lists the approximate muzzle velocity for the different types of rifles with issue ammunition, the battle zero range, the front sight elevation/windage adjustment necessary to move the point of impact 1” at 100 yards and the proper height of trajectory at 100 yards for the given battle zero range. TRAJECTORY COMPARISON FOR THE 6.5 X 52 mm CARTRIDGE M91 CAV/TS M38 CAV/TS M38 SR M41 M91 M91-24/28 RIFLE: MUZZLE VELOCITY: 2,110 2,110 2,150 2,225 2,270 (FPS) BATTLE ZERO: 300 200 200 200 300 (METERS) SIGHT RADIUS: 14.25” 14.25” 17” 23” 26.4” FRONT SIGHT ADJUSMENT FOR .002” .002” .0025” .0035” .004” 1” @ 100 YARDS: H.O.T. FOR BATTLE ZERO @ 100 YARDS: 13.75” 6.5” 5.75” 5.25” 11.5” For those wishing to do their own trajectory calculations the ballistic coefficient for the Italian 162 grain FMJ RN bullet is approximately .275. A gun can be set up to be zeroed at 100 yards with the proper height front sight. You will probably have difficulty finding Carcano sights tall enough to accomplish this. To raise the point of impact the front sight must be lowered and just the opposite is required to lower the point of impact. To move the point of impact left or right the front sight must be moved in the direction it is off. Mauser front sights are a bit loose in the Carcano but can be made to work. SHOOTING: 6.5 x 52 mm The Carcano rifles are capable of outstanding accuracy. With the exception of a military issue type load in the short carbines they are very pleasant to shoot from a recoil standpoint. Because of the above mentioned sight picture for the Carcano, front sight in the bottom of the rear sight notch, it is very important to have a consistent stock-cheek weld for consistent accuracy. It is often very helpful to use a carbide lamp or a sight black product to blacken the sights, which improves contrast and sight picture. CONCLUSION: The 6.5 X 52 is a very useful and capable cartridge. It served well as a military cartridge for over 80 years. The 7.35 X 51 would have been an even more effective military cartridge than the 6.5 X 52 had its timing been different. It is interesting to note that the .308 Winchester / 7.62 X 51 mm NATO and the 7.35 X 51 mm are nearly the same dimensions. Both the 6.5 and 7.35 cartridges are fun to shoot and properly loaded capable of very good accuracy. The Carcano rifle is a well made rifle that is by no means weak or poorly manufactured. They are reliable and strong rifles that are fun to shoot and offer a tremendous variety of types and markings for the collector. I will admit that they are a rather utilitarian rifle as compared to some others. However, they are probably one of the most efficient, cost effective, user friendly battle rifles produced in their era. The rifle, ammunition combination properly loaded is capable of accuracy that will rival the most accurate of the Mauser chamberings. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted February 16, 2006 Share Posted February 16, 2006 [http://groups.yahoo.com/group/21stCenturyS...al/message/2366 **NOTE** -- Many people have duplicated the conditions of the JFK assassination and proven that a good rifleman could make the same shots. Many conspiracy theorists point to some statement by an "expert" who claimed that nobody could fire an old Mannlicher Carcano that fast. Whoever made that statement was just full of crap. Two or three years ago at a shooting match in -- Ohio? -- the organizers recreated this scenario with a tower, moving target, and an old Mannlicher-Carcano with a cheap scope. Practically everyone who entered the match did just as well as Oswald and several did better. The top shooter was left-handed -- just like Oswald! Tom, this is evidence? Some guy on Yahoo talking out of his butt? Who doesn't even know in what state this mythical 'shooting match" took place? Who doesn't even know that Oswald shot right-handed? No one has ever duplicated Oswald's purported shooting feat. Ever. No average shot has picked up a bolt-action rifle with a mis-aligned scope for the first time in months and fired 3 shots from elevation at a moving vehicle more than 50 yards away in less than 9 seconds and (according to you) created 3 hits. While some have re-created the shots--hitting a moving target two or three times in a short time span-- none have done so, to my or anyone else who's written on the subject's knowledge, using a defective scope and after not having shot a rifle for months. If your defense of Oswald's shooting ability rests on his having a substantial amount of practice beforehand, you should say so. But you should realize that this is pure conjecture unsubstantiated by any of the accepted facts. Neither the WC nor the HSCA found any credible evidence Oswald had fired any rifle, let alone the assassination rifle, in months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ecker Posted February 16, 2006 Share Posted February 16, 2006 (edited) Tom, Thanks for the details on the stripes. I'm still not convinced that these were range markers and not driving aids. I'm 90 percent convinced that the fatal head shot came from the south end of the underpass or the south knoll area, as argued by Al. He has written often about "canyon shoots," but I don't recall that he ever included range markers. If JFK's killer did fire from the south knoll/underpass, what were his range markers? Same goes if the fatal shot came from anywhere on the underpass. Were the same markers used for the TSBD usable for a shooter from the underpass? And don't ask me, anyone, how a shooter anywhere on the underpass pulled it off with the people there. The underpass looks like an ideal place to shoot from in terms of trajectory, and it explains the trajectory through JFK's head. Officer McLain has stated that he thinks the shot came from the underpass, and that's with two of his DPD cohorts stationed there. So I'm not alone in considering the possibility, as absurd as it may seem, that the (silenced?) shot came from anywhere up there. It's not the only thing that day that I can't explain. Ron Edited February 16, 2006 by Ron Ecker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted February 16, 2006 Share Posted February 16, 2006 (edited) Tom,Thanks for the details on the stripes. I'm still not convinced that these were range markers and not driving aids. I'm 90 percent convinced that the fatal head shot came from the south end of the underpass or the south knoll area, as argued by Al. He has written often about "canyon shoots," but I don't recall that he ever included range markers. If JFK's killer did fire from the south knoll/underpass, what were his range markers? Same goes if the fatal shot came from anywhere on the underpass. Were the same markers used for the TSBD usable for a shooter from the underpass? And don't ask me, anyone, how a shooter anywhere on the underpass pulled it off with the people there. The underpass looks like an ideal place to shoot from in terms of trajectory, and it explains the trajectory through JFK's head. Officer McLain has stated that he thinks the shot came from the underpass, and that's with two of his DPD cohorts stationed there. So I'm not alone in considering the possibility, as absurd as it may seem, that the (silenced?) shot came from anywhere up there. It's not the only thing that day that I can't explain. Ron I wonder, the view from the south would probably not be of the yellow stripe on the kerb. The only outstanding feature in that area just before the yellow stripe would have been a big bright red blob. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...indpost&p=55113 Edited February 16, 2006 by John Dolva Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Raymond Carroll Posted February 16, 2006 Share Posted February 16, 2006 It's my humble hypothesis that the first shot was taken by someone who "jumped the gun," so to speak, that is, fired before he was supposed to. He would be someone who had the time to stash the gun even given the Marrion Baker timeline, and clearly had time to leave the floor without being seen - in fact, he testified to that very thing, as did others, tho' he's never been connected to the shooting before. As to motive, it could have been as simple as the one most often ascribed to Oswald. This is the most intriguing post I have seen in a long time. Can you please tell us who is referred to in the sentance "in fact, he testified to that very thing, as did others, tho' he's never been connected to the shooting before" Also, who are the "others" who also test ified to this? Thank you in anticipation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 [ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/21stCenturyS...al/message/2366 **NOTE** -- Many people have duplicated the conditions of the JFK assassination and proven that a good rifleman could make the same shots. Many conspiracy theorists point to some statement by an "expert" who claimed that nobody could fire an old Mannlicher Carcano that fast. Whoever made that statement was just full of crap. Two or three years ago at a shooting match in -- Ohio? -- the organizers recreated this scenario with a tower, moving target, and an old Mannlicher-Carcano with a cheap scope. Practically everyone who entered the match did just as well as Oswald and several did better. The top shooter was left-handed -- just like Oswald! Tom, this is evidence? Some guy on Yahoo talking out of his butt? Who doesn't even know in what state this mythical 'shooting match" took place? Who doesn't even know that Oswald shot right-handed? No one has ever duplicated Oswald's purported shooting feat. Ever. No average shot has picked up a bolt-action rifle with a mis-aligned scope for the first time in months and fired 3 shots from elevation at a moving vehicle more than 50 yards away in less than 9 seconds and (according to you) created 3 hits. While some have re-created the shots--hitting a moving target two or three times in a short time span-- none have done so, to my or anyone else who's written on the subject's knowledge, using a defective scope and after not having shot a rifle for months. If your defense of Oswald's shooting ability rests on his having a substantial amount of practice beforehand, you should say so. But you should realize that this is pure conjecture unsubstantiated by any of the accepted facts. Neither the WC nor the HSCA found any credible evidence Oswald had fired any rifle, let alone the assassination rifle, in months. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom, this is evidence? Some guy on Yahoo talking out of his butt? Who doesn't even know in what state this mythical 'shooting match" took place? Who doesn't even know that Oswald shot right-handed? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As with most things, there is some reason! First off, one can "google" or "yahoo" all day long and find multitudes of information relative to virtually any subject matter. No longer does one have to go to the library and search the Dewey Decimal System for who knows what. Virtually any knowledge which one could desire, is now available at the touch of the compurer search mode. This specific item, as well as the Massad Ayoob article were referenced due to the fact that both articles have mention of the "Left-Hand" shooter. Unlike Mr. Carrier, I knew/found out long ago that a good "lefty" operating a bolt action rifle could out shoot the most experienced "righty" that existed. Lost a case of beer to a SF Weapons Instructor on that one. For those non-shooters, it all has to do with not having to remove the trigger finger from it's position, as well as almost taking the rigle down from it's cheek spot weld position on the stock. Having expended considerable research into the subject of LHO's shooting ability, I can state absolutely that no one knows exactly how LHO fired his bolt action rifle, and therein lies much of the confusion. Some family members thought that LHO was left-handed. Some family memers thought that LHO was right-handed. The research community continues to base it's "right-handed" shooter hypothesis on the USMC photo's of LHO with his M1-Garand, during Range Fire. Unfortunately, the "non-shooters" & non-service personnel are not aware of the facts, which I long ago posted on this subject. That being, the US Military forced EVERYONE to shoot right-handed with the M1- Garand. The reason for this is quite simple! The ejection pattern for the shell casing of the M1-Garand, if fired left-handed, would send the hot/expended casing, directly towards the right eye. There are numerous instances of eye injury, and I have one of those "Howell" cousins here, who was actually medically discharged and draws/drew a small disability check due to the injury to his right eye from having shot the M1-Garand from the left-handed position. Therefore, in the US Military, you were forced to shoot the Garand right-handed, irrelevant as to whether you were or were not right handed. Which of course certainly affects one's ability to score well on the shooting range. I know that as a right-handed person, I have also done some left-handed shooting, and rest assured, it would have been marginal at best to pass basic range fire in having to shoot in this unaccustomed manner. So! Was LHO right-handed, or was he left-handed? The answer is, that LHO was, from all factual accounts right-handed. This is not however "absolute" evidence that LHO did not fire a rifle from the left-handed position. (to be continued) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No one has ever duplicated Oswald's purported shooting feat. Ever ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In order to qualify this, lets merely state that no person, utilizing a comparible rifle and the exact same shooting scene and scenario, has managed to achieve three(closely spaced) hits on the target within the time constraints as presented by the WC. (5.8 to 5.9 seconds) However, since the operative word here appears to be "purported", then I must also ask exactly why anyone would believe much of anything put out by the WC. And, since all available evidence fully demonstrates that it was the second shot that impacted at Z313, which thereby gave the 5.8/5.9 second delay for first shot to second shot, even my young son could easily accomplish this, with absolutely ZERO prior rifle experience. Thereafter, the 2.3 (+/-) operating time and third/last/final shot to the back of the head was obviously the best of all the shots. If one recalls, the first shot missed the head of JFK (for whatever reason) by some 10 to 12 inches. Considering the short firing range, this one certainly does not rate up there in olympic competition. Or for that matter even rabbit or squirrel hunting. Now, the second shot was just about as near a miss as it was an accurate hit. Since it struck JFK in the top rear/cowlick area of the head, about an inch to an inch and a half higher and it would have been a miss. This was a good shot however, as one had to take into consideration the "lead" for the moving vehicle. The last shot was in no doubt almost as much luck as it was skill. Since JFK was leaning to his left with the head somewhat horizontal, then this gave a considerabll larger lineal target at which to point and shoot. Was it some relatively good shooting?------Obviously yes. Was it some fantastic great "Annie Oakly" exhibition of rarely seen shooting skills?--------NO. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- using a defective scope and after not having shot a rifle for months. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- One man's defect just so happens to be another man's ideal setup. The variables which affect scope location and proper ability for good sighting and alignment are so compounded that merely attempting to state this as if it were some sort of fact demonstrates a lack of knowledge on the subject matter. Especially when it is completely unknown as to if, when, and/or what shots the scope may (or may not have been utilized for). And since the weapon was fully in the custody of the Dallas Police for a considerable length of time prior to the FBI determination that the weapon could not be accurately fired with the scope without some form of Shim's, then why not run that one by some marginally qualified attorney and see how much validity the scope issue has on anything. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If your defense of Oswald's shooting ability rests on his having a substantial amount of practice beforehand, you should say so.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It has been my experience that, not unlike driving a car, once a shooter, one does not forget it. As soon as the rifle had been "Zeroed" to the shooter's particular sight picture, there is little need for a shooter to have to continually shoot the weapon to maintain shooting ability. The key to the Carcano and to the shot sequencing in Dealy Plaza, has to do with familiarity with the operating mechanism of the weapon. IE: The bolt operation. Therefore, one can sit in the living room, or on the back porch and practice this critical maneuver, without having to shoot/fire the rifle. Until such time as you carry your research to the extend of acquisition of your own 6.5mm 91/38 Carcano, which is in relatively good condition, and thereafter conduct your own testing, then, not unlike all others who have not done so, you are stuck with repeating the "Parrot" wording which one often sees on these forums. The Internet is absolutely FULL of excellent information relative to the accuracy and ease of operation of this rifle, as well as the reliability of same. In that regards, even Massad Ayoob fully states that having never fired one of the weapons, he too had fallen somewhat prey to the frequent misrepresentations which surround this weapon. At least one must give persons such as Chad Zimmerman credit for wanting to resolve the answers for himself and thereafter expending the time; money;; and effort to locate a weapon and the rounds and thereafter conduct his own personal testing. Amazing what a young Chiropractor with virtually no shooter experience can accomplish when he bothers to properly conduct his own independent research. http://www.zimmermanjfk.com/ The world, as well as the research community could certainly utilize a few more "Doubters", be they Thomas's or Zimmerman's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted February 17, 2006 Share Posted February 17, 2006 tom wrote: That being, the US Military forced EVERYONE to shoot right-handed with the M1- Garand. The reason for this is quite simple! The ejection pattern for the shell casing of the M1-Garand, if fired left-handed, would send the hot/expended casing, directly towards the right eye. There are numerous instances of eye injury, and I have one of those "Howell" cousins here, who was actually medically discharged and draws/drew a small disability check due to the injury to his right eye from having shot the M1-Garand from the left-handed position. Therefore, in the US Military, you were forced to shoot the Garand right-handed, irrelevant as to whether you were or were not right handed. [...] There are evidently exceptions to every rule -- Having joined the ARMY -- 18 June, 1962 at Fort Ord, Co. A, 10th Battle Group, 3rd Training Bdge. Our group had the distinction of being the last basic training company to utilize the M-1 Garand as 'the' assigned Basic Training weapon. After our company completed basic trainning the M-1's were to have their bolts welded shut, the rifles (we were told) we're to be dumped in the Pacific Ocean...those familiar with Fort Ord know the Pacific was less than 2 miles away In my BT squad, 3 of us were left handed, NONE of us were forced or coerced to change to right-handed shooting positions. We all shot EXPERT! I scored highest in the entire training battalion. Went to AIT qualified EXPERT with both M-14 and the .45. In Vietnam the .30 cal (air cooled), .50 cal and the 2.5 rocket laucher ALL fired [exception the .30cal air/.50cal) utilizing left the hand position... threw handgranades left handed, too... FWIW 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