Bernice Moore Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 (edited) Hi Ashton, are these of any help to you....? B.. Edited November 11, 2006 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David S. Brownlee Posted November 10, 2006 Author Share Posted November 10, 2006 (edited) perfect...and thanks. In the color picture it shows that the motorcade car would have been going downhill...therefore making it easy for a missed shot to have gone over JFK's head and hit around the underpass. It's really rather plain...no bullet bounced off a tree (lol)...then went from a downward flight to an upward (or horizntal) flight - changing direction - then had enough pop to blow out a piece of concrete and throw up a piece of concrete shrapnel to penetrate skin? Not on this planet. It's simple logic/physics. Edited November 10, 2006 by David S. Brownlee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David S. Brownlee Posted November 10, 2006 Author Share Posted November 10, 2006 (edited) If a jacketed bullet gets slowed down - like hitting a tree branch - the lead in the bullet has the same amount forward velocity and is much heavier, than the case. The "unit" (bullet and casing) will then come apart. The lead bullet (which has not had to deal with inital friction)...will blow past the casing. The casing will come apart and be a low velocity mess. Edited November 10, 2006 by David S. Brownlee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Black Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 If a jacketed bullet gets slowed down - like hitting a tree branch - the lead in the bullet has the same amount forward velocity and is much heavier, than the case. The "unit" (bullet and casing) will then come apart. The lead bullet (which has not had to deal with inital friction)...will blow past the casing. The casing will come apart and be a low velocity mess. Hello David Tho I agree with some of your reasoning, I being an avid shooter, strongly disagree with your last statement. A military fully jacketed bullet should not come apart and shed it's metal "jacket" whether it impacts a small tree branch or a heavy human bone. That is the purpose of the jacketing and the reason that metal jacketed bullets are the only bullets that are acceptable for use in war by the accords of the Geneva convention. The use of fragmenting or bullets having other than a "full metal jacket" constitute a war crime. However since those participating in this assassination were not soldiers firing weapons in "warfare", it is highly likely that lead or some type of frangible bullet would have been used in order to inflict maximum wound damage on the target. Charlie Black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J. Raymond Carroll Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 Hi Ashton, are these of any help to you....? B.. Bernice, regarding the top photo: Is this photo from an official reenactment. Can you point us to the source? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David S. Brownlee Posted November 10, 2006 Author Share Posted November 10, 2006 (edited) Tho I agree with some of your reasoning, I being an avid shooter, strongly disagree with your last statement. A military fully jacketed bullet should not come apart and shed it's metal "jacket" whether it impacts a small tree branch or a heavy human bone. Charlie Black I would agree with you if we were talking about shooting through something like jell - however - hitting a tree branch with the mass/inertia to change the bullet's direction by more than a few degrees would put major stresses on the jacket. The jacket takes the initial friction while the inner lead core (80%+ of the mass) continues on -- breaking through the jacket. The quote below is from a shooting site and states this realistically: "If a bullet has a jacket, the stresses of tumbling may cause it to break apart while it is travelling sideways through flesh - a process known as fragmentation - which further increases the wounding effect. Most 5.56x45 military bullets fragment..."\ Hitting a tree limb hard enough to ricochet to the degree that the "Oswald" bullet would have had to would have torn a jacketed bullet to pieces and rained small parts of the jacket (and some wood splinters) down upon those below the impact point. Edited November 10, 2006 by David S. Brownlee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton Gray Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 Hi Ashton, are these of any help to you....? B.. As always, Bernice. Thanks! Ashton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted November 10, 2006 Share Posted November 10, 2006 Tho I agree with some of your reasoning, I being an avid shooter, strongly disagree with your last statement. A military fully jacketed bullet should not come apart and shed it's metal "jacket" whether it impacts a small tree branch or a heavy human bone. Charlie Black I would agree with you if we were talking about shooting through something like jell - however - hitting a tree branch with the mass/inertia to change the bullet's direction by more than a few degrees would put major stresses on the jacket. The jacket takes the initial friction while the inner lead core (80%+ of the mass) continues on -- breaking through the jacket. The quote below is from a shooting site and states this realistically: "If a bullet has a jacket, the stresses of tumbling may cause it to break apart while it is travelling sideways through flesh - a process known as fragmentation - which further increases the wounding effect. Most 5.56x45 military bullets fragment..."\ Hitting a tree limb hard enough to ricochet to the degree that the "Oswald" bullet would have had to would have torn a jacketed bullet to pieces and rained small parts of the jacket (and some wood splinters) down upon those below the impact point. It depends how big the tree branch. If the bullet hit a thick tree branch, at a sharp angle to its surface, it's possible that the bullet would break up and parts of it would be sharply deflected. On the other hand we should remember that M/C ammunition, when fired straight on into wood, penetrates several feet with little damage to the bullet. . The quote above, by the way, is about M-16 ammunition, which, due to its high speed and pointed nose, was designed to break up. It was, in fact, in violation of the Geneva convention, in spirit, if not in word. To cover their asses, IMO, the U.S. government, through its lackeys at Edgewood Arsenal, including Olivier and Sturdivan, the WC and HSCA ballistics experts, put out the word that the M-16 was deadly because of its high-speed, and because of the large size of its temporary cavity. This misinformation persists down till today. On the McAdams newsgroup, Sturdivan is still insisting, through his colleague Dr. Zimmerman, that the large defect on the top of Kennedy's skull was caused by the temporary cavity, and not by the exiting bullet fragments. This is absolute hogwash, IMO, designed to conceal that the fractures on the x-rays indicate the large defect was most probably an entrance. Fortunately, in recent years, thanks in large part to an actual Military Surgeon named Martin Fackler, the truth about M-16 ammunition and the "cult of speed" has been exposed, and we are now in a position to properly understand the role of speed and bullet shape in wounding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted November 11, 2006 Share Posted November 11, 2006 (edited) Hi Ashton, are these of any help to you....? B.. Bernice, regarding the top photo: Is this photo from an official reenactment. Can you point us to the source? Thanks ****************************** Hi Raymond: From The Saturday Evening Post's line of fire.........By Ben.H.Bagdikin....you will note they say from the window where the killer lay in wait... and a crop from the Altgen's ( lightened ) showing the Dal Tex second floor windows.. ************************* Ashton, your very welcome.. B.. Edited November 11, 2006 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted November 11, 2006 Share Posted November 11, 2006 I'm a newbie on this site - so even after reading much I will be re-stating the obvious. ..but as a Midwestern hunter in my youth...I have shot many types of firearms at lots of things (even through tree branches)...and understand relative ballistics and how bullets change directions. - The shot that brought blood on a bystander by the curb near the underpass could not have been a "tree" ricochet. A true ricochet that held anywhere near it's initial velocity would have had to bounced off a rock (a smooth one in my opinion - like marble). The directional change (hitting live wood - of a round branch that would have gripped - would be too much). This is a layman's approach from a hunter/shooter with decent experince. The Manliicher-CC is a medium-high velocity round without much true punch (unlike a 30.06/7mm at 3000 fps out of the barrel). The MLCC probably put a lighter bullet out at around 2450 fps. Hit a branch and it will ricochet a few meters (5 degrees ) at a range of 200 meters. It will not change direction seriously because in order to do that it would have to hit at such a penetrating angle that the re-direction would slow it down immensely...seriously penetrating the wood and would realistically make it a tumbling projectile. Actually, from my experience with medium powered guns - I would be comfortable catching a bullet that had gone through those physical maneuverings with a baseball glove. - Therefore, the shot that had the power to scar/indent concrete at the underpass was a clear shot. Probably of heavier calibre than a MLCC bullet. It was likely a 30.06 (or similarly high powered) bullet that went straight from the muzzle to the curb. - - - - draw a line backwards from the curb impact , slightly over JFK's head to the origin...and there's a shooter. It only makes sense that a shooter from that area would be shooting for the top of JFK's head - in order to miss Mrs. Connally and others...and when the street went (almost un-noticeably) downhill, the bullet would miss high and arc across to the underpass (probably a 150 or so grain bullet that would still be powerful - but drop at that range) and smack into the curb.. That kind of miss from a true high powered rifle could still be travelling at around 2500 fps at that range and would have the impact to throw up small shrapnel and could injure a bystander. ++++++++++++ The key for me though is the lack of a shot by a "single assassin" when the motorcade was coming straight at the 6th floor window of the TSBD (after the turn). Why on earth would a single assassin pass up a shot like that? The assassin should obviously recess himself/herself back from the window to prevent a gun barrel from showing - and then take the shot when it was the easiest (and least dangerous to others and best to provide a possible second and even easier shot as the motorcade approached - possibly even stopping). That shot would have been easiest and best. There is only one reason that the execution took place where it did (look at an overhead map of Dealy Plaza) - it was a triangulation of fire and the final shot was the closest covered place for a true marksman to hit. When you are killing the King - one thing is most important - you have to kill the King. Therefore the triangulation of fire near the picket fence/grassy knoll was the prime finishing point - and why the motorcade slowed/stopped at that point. (just the opinion of a layman/logical/shooter). Again - I realize most of you experts are WAY past this logic...but it's what I use when arguing with "Oswalders". computer problem - sorry about multiple posts - please delete moderator...Thanks.... Again sorry......DB As probably the only "Oswalder" on the site, here goes. First off, certainly good to have someone who has at least shot game and has some understandings of the shooting. Secondly, we seldom waited until a big buck ore even duck/geese in flight had passed and thereafter shot at their arse. However, the frontal approach shot has been discussed on numerous occassions, and it would have been a complete suicide shoot. Everyone would have immediately looked straight up, and there was the shooter at the window, thus exposing him to potentially immediate return fire. Bucks & Ducks do not shoot back. Thirdly, the visors were up on the limo, JBC sat directly in front of JFK, thus the shot on an approaching target of unknown speed, on a downward angle of fire of approximately 60-degrees would have required a lead in which the shooter was in fact aiming at some point on JBC and hope that the vehicle speed/forward movement brought JFK directly into the bullet flight path for a head shot/hit. An extremely difficult shot! And although the TSDB corner location could have been selected in order to have this shot capability (in event the bubble top was on the Limo), an experienced shooter would know that the shooting, as done, was the easiest to achieve. The Manliicher-CC is a medium-high velocity round without much true punch Yes, at 2,200 to 2,400 fps the round rates "medium/high" or upper medium range. However the round, due to it's mass and design, has tremendous "Punch". Might try reading up on the usage of the 6.5mm identical bullet in the hunting of elephants, as well as the fact that a Carcano FMJ round has been fired into soft pine with an entrance of some 41-inches of penetration without that much loss/deformation to the round. 41-inches of soft pine penetration is more than sufficient "punch". it was a triangulation of fire Watching too many "JFK" re-runs and listening to the David Ferree actor can create this symptom. Tom P.S. The Presidential Limo was in excess of 20 feet in length and directly in alignment with the fire from the sixth floor window, and travelling INTO the path of the bullet flight. Therefore, even were one aiming at the front hood of the vehicle, the Limo would still continue to travel into the bullet flight path and at least the car would have been hit, had there been "THE SHOT THAT MISSED". Hi Tom, In one photo I have seen which was supposed to depict the target as seen from the TSBD, but which actually seemed to be from the dal-tex, the target was moving directly away from the shooter. Wouldn't a target, moving slowly and directly on a slight decline away from the shooter, make it very easy to reacquire that target as the only true compensation to be made would be for the declination of that target? Not being a marksman myself, but, having some experience shooting rifles, I know that, for me, acquiring and then hitting a moving target, across my field of vision, is much more difficult than one that is dead on. Anyway...what I guess I am trying to say is this...the dal-tex position would have been my preferred position to shoot from because it would give me the best chance of making several quick and accurate shots. You may believe that Oswald did the shooting, but, with only circumstantial (and questionable) evidence available to support that position...can you understand why so many do not believe him to be the shooter? In one photo I have seen which was supposed to depict the target as seen from the TSBD, but which actually seemed to be from the dal-tex, the target was moving directly away from the shooter. Yes, I have that and if recalled correctly, it was done by and appeared in "LOOK" Magazine. And, due to the corner position from which taken, it was almost an exact straight alignment as opposed to the slight cross-angle from the sixth floor window of the TSDB. Wouldn't a target, moving slowly and directly on a slight decline away from the shooter, make it very easy to reacquire that target as the only true compensation to be made would be for the declination of that target? Actually, it makes it considerably easier. Recoil raises the muzzle end. Then, as one begins to come back into position, they merely have to look downrange, come down until the front of the Limo is seen, slow the downward movement, and find the target. It was the "Best" of all shooting conditions based on the position available, and yes, the Dal-Tex Bldg, (or whatever it was) would have been even easier. However, the cross-angle of fire from the TSDB was so minor, that it was hardly of any effect on the shots. Not being a marksman myself, but, having some experience shooting rifles, I know that, for me, acquiring and then hitting a moving target, across my field of vision, is much more difficult than one that is dead on. As it is for anyone! And when one takes into consideration that even with "calibrated eyeballs", one can not compute the forward speed of the target across the field, then throw in the downward drop in elevation as created by the downward slope of Elm St. and one has created one of the most difficult firing conditions for accuracy/head hits. Exactly why so many highly qualified shooters miss quail when flushed "across" the field of fire. Moving fast and rising at the same time, requires the best of shooters. Anyway...what I guess I am trying to say is this...the dal-tex position would have been my preferred position to shoot from because it would give me the best chance of making several quick and accurate shots. Absolutely correct. However, several witnesses observed the shooter in the sixth floor window fire three shots. James Jarman and those directly below, heard three shots from directly above, three shell casings were found, and lastly, JFK was hit three times from the rear. Enough to convince me that ALL of the shots fired came from the sixth floor window, and considering the lack of difficulty/difficulty rating in even this firing position, then I have absolutely no problems with accepting that all three of the shots fired came from this location. In that regards, I go back to the approximate 5.7 to 5.9 seconds from shot#1 to shot#2 (Z313 impact). Now that this has been explained, perhaps even the great snipers will re-think and re-evaluate the difficulty rating. More than sufficient time to re-acquire the target, even utilizing the scope. Lastly, the third shot was the one which everyone should be complaining about as it was fired just about as fast as the weapon could be operated. And, were one to believe the Z-Film, then it was done in only approximately 1.9 seconds. However, since I was never so misguided that I believed anything which the WC had to say on the subject, rest assured that I not only do not believe that the Presidential Limo was travelling at a rate of speed of approximately 11mph from Z313 to 30+feet farther down Elm St. directly in front of Mr. James Altgens. I do believe that the difference between an average speed of approximately 9mph and 11mph would equate to just about 15 or so frames of the Z-film which appear to have been excised. And since braking vehicles do not average 11mph; falling people do not exceed the speed of sound; and heads do not move forward or backward faster than the speed of sound, then there is little difficulty in recognizing exactly why we do not see the impact to the head of JFK which James Altgens clearly observed, and which blew blood, cerebral tissue, and a bone fragment directly in his direction. And, the "running/jumping" man will ultimately have the last word on this subject. Tom P.S. The bullet in the lower leg of JBC bore the exact characteristic design of the MC FMJ rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted November 11, 2006 Share Posted November 11, 2006 I'm a newbie on this site - so even after reading much I will be re-stating the obvious. ..but as a Midwestern hunter in my youth...I have shot many types of firearms at lots of things (even through tree branches)...and understand relative ballistics and how bullets change directions. - The shot that brought blood on a bystander by the curb near the underpass could not have been a "tree" ricochet. A true ricochet that held anywhere near it's initial velocity would have had to bounced off a rock (a smooth one in my opinion - like marble). The directional change (hitting live wood - of a round branch that would have gripped - would be too much). This is a layman's approach from a hunter/shooter with decent experince. The Manliicher-CC is a medium-high velocity round without much true punch (unlike a 30.06/7mm at 3000 fps out of the barrel). The MLCC probably put a lighter bullet out at around 2450 fps. Hit a branch and it will ricochet a few meters (5 degrees ) at a range of 200 meters. It will not change direction seriously because in order to do that it would have to hit at such a penetrating angle that the re-direction would slow it down immensely...seriously penetrating the wood and would realistically make it a tumbling projectile. Actually, from my experience with medium powered guns - I would be comfortable catching a bullet that had gone through those physical maneuverings with a baseball glove. - Therefore, the shot that had the power to scar/indent concrete at the underpass was a clear shot. Probably of heavier calibre than a MLCC bullet. It was likely a 30.06 (or similarly high powered) bullet that went straight from the muzzle to the curb. - - - - draw a line backwards from the curb impact , slightly over JFK's head to the origin...and there's a shooter. It only makes sense that a shooter from that area would be shooting for the top of JFK's head - in order to miss Mrs. Connally and others...and when the street went (almost un-noticeably) downhill, the bullet would miss high and arc across to the underpass (probably a 150 or so grain bullet that would still be powerful - but drop at that range) and smack into the curb.. That kind of miss from a true high powered rifle could still be travelling at around 2500 fps at that range and would have the impact to throw up small shrapnel and could injure a bystander. ++++++++++++ The key for me though is the lack of a shot by a "single assassin" when the motorcade was coming straight at the 6th floor window of the TSBD (after the turn). Why on earth would a single assassin pass up a shot like that? The assassin should obviously recess himself/herself back from the window to prevent a gun barrel from showing - and then take the shot when it was the easiest (and least dangerous to others and best to provide a possible second and even easier shot as the motorcade approached - possibly even stopping). That shot would have been easiest and best. There is only one reason that the execution took place where it did (look at an overhead map of Dealy Plaza) - it was a triangulation of fire and the final shot was the closest covered place for a true marksman to hit. When you are killing the King - one thing is most important - you have to kill the King. Therefore the triangulation of fire near the picket fence/grassy knoll was the prime finishing point - and why the motorcade slowed/stopped at that point. (just the opinion of a layman/logical/shooter). Again - I realize most of you experts are WAY past this logic...but it's what I use when arguing with "Oswalders". computer problem - sorry about multiple posts - please delete moderator...Thanks.... Again sorry......DB As probably the only "Oswalder" on the site, here goes. First off, certainly good to have someone who has at least shot game and has some understandings of the shooting. Secondly, we seldom waited until a big buck ore even duck/geese in flight had passed and thereafter shot at their arse. However, the frontal approach shot has been discussed on numerous occassions, and it would have been a complete suicide shoot. Everyone would have immediately looked straight up, and there was the shooter at the window, thus exposing him to potentially immediate return fire. Bucks & Ducks do not shoot back. Thirdly, the visors were up on the limo, JBC sat directly in front of JFK, thus the shot on an approaching target of unknown speed, on a downward angle of fire of approximately 60-degrees would have required a lead in which the shooter was in fact aiming at some point on JBC and hope that the vehicle speed/forward movement brought JFK directly into the bullet flight path for a head shot/hit. An extremely difficult shot! And although the TSDB corner location could have been selected in order to have this shot capability (in event the bubble top was on the Limo), an experienced shooter would know that the shooting, as done, was the easiest to achieve. The Manliicher-CC is a medium-high velocity round without much true punch Yes, at 2,200 to 2,400 fps the round rates "medium/high" or upper medium range. However the round, due to it's mass and design, has tremendous "Punch". Might try reading up on the usage of the 6.5mm identical bullet in the hunting of elephants, as well as the fact that a Carcano FMJ round has been fired into soft pine with an entrance of some 41-inches of penetration without that much loss/deformation to the round. 41-inches of soft pine penetration is more than sufficient "punch". it was a triangulation of fire Watching too many "JFK" re-runs and listening to the David Ferree actor can create this symptom. Tom P.S. The Presidential Limo was in excess of 20 feet in length and directly in alignment with the fire from the sixth floor window, and travelling INTO the path of the bullet flight. Therefore, even were one aiming at the front hood of the vehicle, the Limo would still continue to travel into the bullet flight path and at least the car would have been hit, had there been "THE SHOT THAT MISSED". Hi Tom, In one photo I have seen which was supposed to depict the target as seen from the TSBD, but which actually seemed to be from the dal-tex, the target was moving directly away from the shooter. Wouldn't a target, moving slowly and directly on a slight decline away from the shooter, make it very easy to reacquire that target as the only true compensation to be made would be for the declination of that target? Not being a marksman myself, but, having some experience shooting rifles, I know that, for me, acquiring and then hitting a moving target, across my field of vision, is much more difficult than one that is dead on. Anyway...what I guess I am trying to say is this...the dal-tex position would have been my preferred position to shoot from because it would give me the best chance of making several quick and accurate shots. You may believe that Oswald did the shooting, but, with only circumstantial (and questionable) evidence available to support that position...can you understand why so many do not believe him to be the shooter? In one photo I have seen which was supposed to depict the target as seen from the TSBD, but which actually seemed to be from the dal-tex, the target was moving directly away from the shooter. Yes, I have that and if recalled correctly, it was done by and appeared in "LOOK" Magazine. And, due to the corner position from which taken, it was almost an exact straight alignment as opposed to the slight cross-angle from the sixth floor window of the TSDB. Wouldn't a target, moving slowly and directly on a slight decline away from the shooter, make it very easy to reacquire that target as the only true compensation to be made would be for the declination of that target? Actually, it makes it considerably easier. Recoil raises the muzzle end. Then, as one begins to come back into position, they merely have to look downrange, come down until the front of the Limo is seen, slow the downward movement, and find the target. It was the "Best" of all shooting conditions based on the position available, and yes, the Dal-Tex Bldg, (or whatever it was) would have been even easier. However, the cross-angle of fire from the TSDB was so minor, that it was hardly of any effect on the shots. Not being a marksman myself, but, having some experience shooting rifles, I know that, for me, acquiring and then hitting a moving target, across my field of vision, is much more difficult than one that is dead on. As it is for anyone! And when one takes into consideration that even with "calibrated eyeballs", one can not compute the forward speed of the target across the field, then throw in the downward drop in elevation as created by the downward slope of Elm St. and one has created one of the most difficult firing conditions for accuracy/head hits. Exactly why so many highly qualified shooters miss quail when flushed "across" the field of fire. Moving fast and rising at the same time, requires the best of shooters. Anyway...what I guess I am trying to say is this...the dal-tex position would have been my preferred position to shoot from because it would give me the best chance of making several quick and accurate shots. Absolutely correct. However, several witnesses observed the shooter in the sixth floor window fire three shots. James Jarman and those directly below, heard three shots from directly above, three shell casings were found, and lastly, JFK was hit three times from the rear. Enough to convince me that ALL of the shots fired came from the sixth floor window, and considering the lack of difficulty/difficulty rating in even this firing position, then I have absolutely no problems with accepting that all three of the shots fired came from this location. In that regards, I go back to the approximate 5.7 to 5.9 seconds from shot#1 to shot#2 (Z313 impact). Now that this has been explained, perhaps even the great snipers will re-think and re-evaluate the difficulty rating. More than sufficient time to re-acquire the target, even utilizing the scope. Lastly, the third shot was the one which everyone should be complaining about as it was fired just about as fast as the weapon could be operated. And, were one to believe the Z-Film, then it was done in only approximately 1.9 seconds. However, since I was never so misguided that I believed anything which the WC had to say on the subject, rest assured that I not only do not believe that the Presidential Limo was travelling at a rate of speed of approximately 11mph from Z313 to 30+feet farther down Elm St. directly in front of Mr. James Altgens. I do believe that the difference between an average speed of approximately 9mph and 11mph would equate to just about 15 or so frames of the Z-film which appear to have been excised. And since braking vehicles do not average 11mph; falling people do not exceed the speed of sound; and heads do not move forward or backward faster than the speed of sound, then there is little difficulty in recognizing exactly why we do not see the impact to the head of JFK which James Altgens clearly observed, and which blew blood, cerebral tissue, and a bone fragment directly in his direction. And, the "running/jumping" man will ultimately have the last word on this subject. Tom P.S. The bullet in the lower leg of JBC bore the exact characteristic design of the MC FMJ rounds. Probably another double post! Sorry about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted November 11, 2006 Share Posted November 11, 2006 (edited) If a jacketed bullet gets slowed down - like hitting a tree branch - the lead in the bullet has the same amount forward velocity and is much heavier, than the case. The "unit" (bullet and casing) will then come apart. The lead bullet (which has not had to deal with inital friction)...will blow past the casing. The casing will come apart and be a low velocity mess. If a jacketed bullet gets slowed down - like hitting a tree branch - the lead in the bullet has the same amount forward velocity and is much heavier, than the case. The "unit" (bullet and casing) will then come apart. The lead bullet (which has not had to deal with inital friction)...will blow past the casing. The casing will come apart and be a low velocity mess. David; You truly need to go back to the drawing board and do your homework. I have fired 10 WCC 6.5mm FMJ rounds directly through a one-inch thick live oak limb, thereaafter to pass through 10 rolls of paper towels, into a bucket filled with water. Absolutely NONE of the bullets fragmented. Two of the bullets had that portion of the copper jacket rearward of the crimp markings tear off and separate/pull off the base of the bullet. This "tearing" was due to the full circumferential pressure exerted onto the copper jacket of the bullet, which tends to somewhat "stretch" the copper jacket backwards as the bullet passed through the limb. The reason for the copper jacket separation at the crimp marks is quite obvious, this represented a point in the copper jacket where it's integrity had been compromised and "stress concentrator" had been created due to the crimp marks. Other than these two, all other bullets maintained the complete integrity of the copper jacket. In event that you would take time to evaluate the factual evidence, you will find that CE399 originally demonstrated the condition in which it's copperjacket had been "stretched" backwards, thus creating relative sharp edges around the circumference of the bullet base. This type deformity can ONLY be achieved by the bullet passing through a substance of such mass and density that the surrounding pressures cause the bullet jacket to "stretch" backwards as the bullet passes through the substance. I would also add that this is also apparantly the reason in which the copper jacket to the base of CE399 was ultimately removed at some point by persons unknown. Anyone with even a smurf size/smidget of understanding of the physical forces necessary to stretch the copper jacket of such a bullet, backwards in a completely uniform and equal amount, would know that this bullet passed through a substance of considerable mass and density. And, in that regards, one does not even have to take into consideration the slight flattening to the bullet nose, caused by impact to the tree limb, as well as the circular striations in the copper jacket at the nose of the bullet, where the spinning impact with the bark of the tree created these circular anomalies to the bullet. With all that in mind, might I recommend that you go back and attempt to study, as well as duplicate the evidence, prior to attempting to explain what WCC 6.5mm Carcano rounds do, and do not do, upon impact with many things. Edited November 11, 2006 by Thomas H. Purvis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Forman Posted November 11, 2006 Share Posted November 11, 2006 David - What's really needed are cadavers as per Wecht. Fire as many rounds as you want from any distance - let's look at the result. We had someone here who attempted to demonstrate the damage to the skull of a deer - I don't remember his name off hand - he consistently got a relatively small entry wound and a blowout the size of a golfball. If we are talking about dumdums [as almost immediately suggested in newspapers, etc.] - and mind you, I don't know what I am talking about - then we aren't in the Oswald ballfield anymore anyway. I myself - like Tom - think about buying an MC just to fool around and do some test firing. I bought a copy of the Warren Report [not all volumes], which had been shot by an MC - I think the 'artist' picked the page with Kennedy's photograph on purpose - the bullethole was through his forehead - anyway, included were samples of a 6.5mm round, and the samples of the round that passed through the book. I think I still have them someplace. The shot fired through the book were mere shreds of metal. I'm sure what Tom is talking about is feasible - in terms of paper towels and water. I don't know about blowing large holes in people's heads - or the impact that skin and bone makes on a round. Ignorant thus far. Anyway - since you are a 'Newbie' - Tom has a lot to offer relative to experience and research and I would say he has a lot of value to add. My 2 cents. Welcome aboard in any case. I wouldn't mind putting some of the stuff Camper had to say in his book up here on the MC. Maybe we could hash through it. I'll volunteer to transcribe - some interesting stuff. - lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David S. Brownlee Posted November 11, 2006 Author Share Posted November 11, 2006 (edited) Anyone with even a smurf size/smidget of understanding of the physical forces necessary to stretch the copper jacket of such a bullet, backwards in a completely uniform and equal amount, would know that this bullet passed through a substance of considerable mass and density.And, in that regards, one does not even have to take into consideration the slight flattening to the bullet nose, caused by impact to the tree limb, as well as the circular striations in the copper jacket at the nose of the bullet, where the spinning impact with the bark of the tree created these circular anomalies to the bullet. With all that in mind, might I recommend that you go back and attempt to study, as well as duplicate the evidence, prior to attempting to explain what WCC 6.5mm Carcano rounds do, and do not do, upon impact with many things. Nice talk...have you ever even seen a spent bullet? I have. Slight "flattening my arse" the jacket/casing would have come totally apart. Did you pay attention to the Washington DC sniper case? The reason for the terrible damage to the victims was due to the fragmentation of the jacketed bullets as they passed through flesh - yes flesh - not a 2" piece of wood - flesh. This is documented. Fragmentation. You can write all you want - but this is pretty simple. If a jacketed bullet comes apart going through flesh - it will be totally shredded going through solid wood. Simple physics my man. and as far as the Smurf comment GFYS...(from one VFW member to another - if you are one). Edited November 11, 2006 by David S. Brownlee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Black Posted November 11, 2006 Share Posted November 11, 2006 David I do not intentionally wish to be harsh. But since you insist on persisting, it is obvious to the members of this forum who have considerable shooting experience, and who have studied ballstics and the ballistic characteristics of the MC ammo in question, that you don't understand what you you are talking about. The result of your continuing this subject will tend to confuse those who would truly like to learn of the characteristics and behavior of this MC rifle and its FMJ ammo. What you personally believe matters little to me once you have been offered the facts. However, it is not in the best interest of persons unfamiliar to the subject, to possibly accept, as fact, your erroneous interpretations of 6.5mm., fully jacketed Manlicher Carcano ammunition. Many forum members who are unfamiliar with a technical subject, have a tendency to accept what they read on this forum, even if the poster may have less knowlege than they themselves do. Rather than arguing, the effort of a little further study of this subject, should clarify the issue for you. Charlie Black 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