Oswald took 10.2 seconds to fire all three shots.

[Andrew Mason]

If there were three shots from the Sniper's Nest and the first shot was between Z-186 and Z-202 (as you said in an earlier post), when were the second and third shots?

The original scenario as portrayed in the model that was built by the FBI for Warren Conmission based on the witness evidence seems about right:

[Tom Graves]

Over a maximum of "about" 6.939 seconds overall?

LOL!

[Charles Collins]

I have. And when I put the two men in their seats this is what I get:

Based on the angle of the trajectory of the bullet I am assuming your image represents when you believe the first shot took place (~Z192).

Follow the yellow dashed line. Then click your heels together three times and say…


In the Betzner 3 (~Z186) photo (below) we can see the (yellow) line of sight from his camera lines up with the left rear handhold and the glass window at the right end of the parade bar.




On the drawing of the limo, the left rear handhold and the glass window at the right end of the parade bar are connected with a yellow dashed line which is measured to be approximately at a 25-degrees angle to the long axis of the limo.




If we place a yellow dashed line at 25-degrees onto your image that intersects the glass window at the right end of the parade bar, we can see that it crosses JBC on his right side.




If you are following the yellow dashed line, you should be able to see that in the Betzner 3 photo, we do not see any part of JBC. We can conclude that, in Betzner 3, JBC must be to the left of the yellow dashed line and out of sight behind the man in the foreground. Therefore your positioning of JBC in your image must be in error (otherwise we should see JBC’s right shoulder in the Betzner 3 photo).
 We can also see in Betzner 3 that JFK is well to the right of the yellow dashed line. In your image, JFK has been placed such that his left shoulder is very close to the yellow dashed line. This suggests that JFK was further to his right than what you have portrayed in your image.


There’s no place like reality. There’s no place like reality.

[Charles Collins]

I was just responding to your comment. I don’t see how he determines their horizontal distance from reading either paragraph.

Myers appears to be matching the appearance of his models to two dimensional images and concluding that the 3D positions are accurately established when the models match the 2D photographic images. There is inherent error in doing that because one cannot measure the missing dimension in a 2D photo.  He admits of none.  That’s a problem.

He is using many frames of a movie in which the objects are constantly moving and changing angles relative to the camera. The dimensions you appear to be referencing are not missing. They would only be “missing” if the dimension were to be directly away from the camera on the exact line of sight from the camera to the object. That is not the case here. And even if it were to be, the size of the appearance of the object changes with distance. So there should be a difference that might be able to be detected by a computer, even if not easily apparent to the naked eye.

Dale Myers describes how he located the limo model in his Dealey Plaza model using key frames of the Zapruder film. I assume that, due to wanting to keep his article to a reasonable size, he doesn’t specifically include everything he used to assist that process. But it seems to me that he would have used other photographic records and other evidence as needed. He does indicate that that is exactly what he did for the Houston Street segment of his animation. Are you suggesting that, if he missed the exact location of the limo in the direction perpendicular to the long axis of the limo by more than a maximum of 4”at it’s furthest distance from the camera (less when the limo is closer), that it would not be noticeable when he was matching his model to the associated Z-frame(s)? I think that it would be noticeable.

 Then Dale Myers tells us that he used the same process for locating the models of JFK and JBC. Therefore I submit that if he missed the exact location of the models of JFK and JBC by more than his specified error margins (3 to 6 degrees, and 4” maximum at the furthest distance, less when closer) I believe that it would be noticeable when he was matching his model to the associated Z-frame(s).

[Andrew Mason]

If you are following the yellow dashed line, you should be able to see that in the Betzner 3 photo, we do not see any part of JBC. We can conclude that, in Betzner 3, JBC must be to the left of the yellow dashed line and out of sight behind the man in the foreground. Therefore your positioning of JBC in your image must be in error (otherwise we should see JBC’s right shoulder in the Betzner 3 photo).
 We can also see in Betzner 3 that JFK is well to the right of the yellow dashed line. In your image, JFK has been placed such that his left shoulder is very close to the yellow dashed line. This suggests that JFK was further to his right than what you have portrayed in your image.

You appear to be making the same mistake made by the HSCA in accepting Thomas Canning’s placement of JBC.


 The assumption was that the man in front of Betzner was blocking the view of JBC’ s right shoulder, so his right shoulder was left of your yellow line. But Altgens’ #5 photo on Houston shows that JBC’s right shoulder was below the line of sight due to the height of the top of the back seat.

There’s no place like reality. There’s no place like reality.

… provided you are using the correct reality.

[Charles Collins]

You appear to be making the same mistake made by the HSCA in accepting Thomas Canning’s placement of JBC.


 The assumption was that the man in front of Betzner was blocking the view of JBC’ s right shoulder, so his right shoulder was left of your yellow line. But Altgens’ #5 photo on Houston shows that JBC’s right shoulder was below the line of sight due to the height of the top of the back seat.


… provided you are using the correct reality.

The assumption was that the man in front of Betzner was blocking the view of JBC’ s right shoulder, so his right shoulder was left of your yellow line. But Altgens’ #5 photo on Houston shows that JBC’s right shoulder was below the line of sight due to the height of the top of the back seat.

 

All one has to do is look at the back of Mrs. JBC (in that Altgens’ 5 photo) and they can easily see that the seat backs of the jumper seats are not high enough to block the view of JBC’s shoulder. Do you really think the HSCA and Thomas Canning would make such an error as you suggest? Give me a break Andrew!



  provided you are using the correct reality.

There is only one reality and you definitely need to find those red ruby slippers and keep clicking your heels together…

[Tom Graves]

The assumption was that the man in front of Betzner was blocking the view of JBC’ s right shoulder, so his right shoulder was left of your yellow line. But Altgens’ #5 photo on Houston shows that JBC’s right shoulder was below the line of sight due to the height of the top of the back seat.

 

All one has to do is look at the back of Mrs. JBC (in that Altgens’ 5 photo) and they can easily see that the seat backs of the jumper seats are not high enough to block the view of JBC’s shoulder. Do you really think the HSCA and Thomas Canning would make such an error as you suggest? Give me a break Andrew!



  provided you are using the correct reality.

There is only one reality and you definitely need to find those red ruby slippers and keep clicking your heels together…

WTF does any of this have to do with whether or not all three shots were fired in 10.2 seconds?

Does anyone here really believe that the first shot was fired at Z-192, or some-such thing?