|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 December 13, 2011, 03:45:49 PM
|
Full Member
Posts: 184
|
So no one has the answer as to whether the jump seats are different sizes or not? I would have though some CT would have spent 30 pages arguing about this.
Or is it a mistake in the drawing?
I know it doesn't have much of an impact on Connally's position but it's driving me nuts.
-------------------------
|
|
|
 Reply |
|
|
|
|
December 13, 2011, 04:24:57 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 8302
|
I don't see where the photos above differ from this one.
This is a ridiculous diagram because - 1) The WC never supported (let alone proved) a single shot came from the eastern TSBD window, 2) that LHO fired a shot (let alone multiple shots) from the eastern sixth floor window of the TSBD, and 3) that CE-399 caused seven wounds in JBC and JFK! In fact, the FBI and the prosectors have shown and stated that CE-399 was NOT the bullet that did this supposed feat. You have nothing left but silly diagrams at this point.
-------------------------
-------------------------
A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
"Benavides- Saw Oswald kill Tippit, picked him out of a lineup." - Brian "Doesn't Know His Rear From His Back" Walker
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
December 13, 2011, 04:56:43 PM
|
Sr. Member
Posts: 264
|
Ok, yes, i'm at work and i used the ugly microsoft Paint program. On my 3 d model, i have some range of positions which are ok for the arm position. I am spending time to place connally, and it is really hard. Altgens 255, Betzner and willis are helpfull, but nobody will get a 100% match. I will make my whole database public for reserch, but still don't know how. The angle for the back wound is a problem, i have an angle which is high compared to the 21-24 degrees that i often see. All this is hard but i'm doing like you, i'm asking on this forum without shame and i accept answers, from "LN" or "CT" whaen it is accurate. About the Altgen picture, he used a telephoto 105 mm which deform, especially the whote marks are not continuous, but the limo was never in the center of the center line, and went to the left a long time after .... after what, this is the question. I used the Z film frame by frame to place the limo so, the curve of heading must show something interesting, i'll check that. Checked below As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
Register or LoginUploaded with As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login
-------------------------
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 13, 2011, 07:05:24 PM by Thierry Speth »
|
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
December 13, 2011, 08:14:25 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 3791
Well, somebody did it.
|
So no one has the answer as to whether the jump seats are different sizes or not? I would have though some CT would have spent 30 pages arguing about this.
Or is it a mistake in the drawing?
I know it doesn't have much of an impact on Connally's position but it's driving me nuts.
If there is a mistake in the drawing it is probably what Anthony Marsh pointed out as a problem with the scan and not the original drawing, we saw that on the survey map as well and spent considerable time to striaghten it out.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
December 13, 2011, 08:43:16 PM
|
Full Member
Posts: 184
|
If there is a mistake in the drawing it is probably what Anthony Marsh pointed out as a problem with the scan and not the original drawing, we saw that on the survey map as well and spent considerable time to striaghten it out.
Is there a higher resolution scan of that drawing anywhere? I don't mean to keep harping on it and I believe it to be inconsequential myself as far as the bullet path is concerned. But I know the Prudhommes of the world will see it as a CIA plot to overthrow the planet. For my part I don't think it is a mistake in the scan. If you look at the text it seems to even say there is 2.5" of gap on the governors side, and 2.25" on Mrs. side. Unfortunately the text is just small enough that I might be misreading it. There is a very slight discrepancy in the thickness of the door too, but the error is less than the width of the lines themselves so I am chalking that up to a mistake. It happens to exacerbate the gap difference though.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
December 13, 2011, 08:52:32 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 3791
Well, somebody did it.
|
I will make my whole database public for reserch, but still don't know how. The angle for the back wound is a problem, i have an angle which is high compared to the 21-24 degrees that i often see. All this is hard but I'm doing like you, i'm asking on this forum without shame and i accept answers, from "LN" or "CT" whaen it is accurate.
Depending on the elevation difference I am getting 19.5 ° from the TSBD to JFK's back, 181 horizontal feet, 64.2 elevation ▲, leaves 192 travel at 19.5 °, at frame 224.
+ 3° road grade and its 22.5°.
My hunch from going on Google and walking down Elm street is that the 3° drop doesn't start out at 3° but gradually slopes up to a 3° incline, I think where the limo is at 224 may be more like 1.50° - 2.25°. The elevation map doesn't coincide with a 3° slope at that point either, it shows that it is more like a 1.5° slope, it would be nice to have exact measurements of the slope. Because 19.5 from the TSBD is starting to look like 21° at the limo.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
December 14, 2011, 12:22:23 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 6715
|
Is there a higher resolution scan of that drawing anywhere?
I don't mean to keep harping on it and I believe it to be inconsequential myself as far as the bullet path is concerned. But I know the Prudhommes of the world will see it as a CIA plot to overthrow the planet.
For my part I don't think it is a mistake in the scan. If you look at the text it seems to even say there is 2.5" of gap on the governors side, and 2.25" on Mrs. side. Unfortunately the text is just small enough that I might be misreading it. There is a very slight discrepancy in the thickness of the door too, but the error is less than the width of the lines themselves so I am chalking that up to a mistake. It happens to exacerbate the gap difference though.
Well, tell me what resolution you want. 300,600,1200,2400 DPI?
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 14, 2011, 01:13:59 AM
|
Full Member
Posts: 184
|
Well, tell me what resolution you want. 300,600,1200,2400 DPI?
Big!
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
December 14, 2011, 02:51:22 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 858
|
I tried refining the HSCA limo drawing. There were several points on the HSCA versions that I departed on. The line representing the rearmost "crack" of the back door and the mirrors were simply wrong on the HSCA drawing. The overhead grab-bar (if I can call it that) was oversimplified on the HSCA drawing with oversized hand-holds; I tried to add in as many grab-bar and side-window features as I could see in various photos, but I don't really know if the data for the grab-bar is all that accurate. I may have moved the rear-trunk antennas a bit (can't remember right now) and I added the little clips on the car-rail by the back seat that allow the roof-sections to attach. I showed Nellie's side window a bit up as it was in photos (I don't know if that's how it would look directly overhead; it's a best guess). Sorry, I did not produce a scale. You use the drawing at your own peril. The seats and car-rail are essentially unchanged from the HSCA drawing. That's the part most necessary for a trajectory study.  As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login if photo doesn't show.
-------------------------
-------------------------
 "It's, uh, very heavy." — President Johnson on receiving the Warren Report in the Oval Office, Sept. 24, 1964
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
|
| 0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
|
