The lapel flip -- what did i miss?

Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: The lapel flip -- what did i miss?  (Read 112324 times)

Online Marjan Rynkiewicz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1043
Re: The lapel flip -- what did i miss?
« Reply #77 on: December 01, 2023, 03:04:56 AM »
Here are my latest estimates (done today) off Lattimer's 18 frames (actually 18 photos)(it was not a film)(camera took 30 pix/sec)(Lattimer's test dunn in 1994).
Its difficult to see what is what in Lattimer's 1994 frames (pix) – its partly guesswork.
The flap on the jacket on the 1994 dummy was much longer than the 1963 jacket, so i have divided the 1994 flap into the lower flap & the upper flap.
In the 1963 Zapruder frames the 1963 flap is in effect the upper flap in the 1994 frames.
I assumed that the 1963 slug hit Connally at Z220.0.  This accords with the max flip at Lattimer 07 (1994) happening at the same time as the flip in Z224 (1963).
We don’t see any debris cloud in the 1963 Zapruder frames – the exit outshoot on the 1963 jacket is hidden below the level of the 1963 limo door.
Frame … Time s … Bulge % … Lower/Upper [Flap Flip %] … Debris Cloud % … Zapruder Frame … Connally 1963 Flap.
…. 00 …. 0.0000 …. 000 ……….. 010 …. 000 ……………………………….. 075 ……………………. Z220.0 ….…. hidden by sign..
…. 01 …. 0.0333 …. 040 ………...010 …. 000 ……………………………….. 100 …………………... Z220.6 …….. hidden by sign..
…. 02 …. 0.0667 …. 070 ……….. 060 …. 010 ………………………………. 050 ……………………. Z221.2 … half hidden by sign..
…. 03 …. 0.1000 …. 100 ……….. 100 …. 010 ………………………………. 040 ……………………. Z221.8 … half hidden by sign..
…. 04 …. 0.1333 …. 100 …….... 100 …. 010 ………………………………. 030 ……………………. Z222.4 …….….... no flip [edit 1dec2023][Andrew Mason has pointed out that there is a small flip or bulge in Z222].
…. 05 …. 0.1667 …. 090 …….…. 100 …. 020 ……………………………... 010 ……………………. Z223.0 …….….... no flip ..
…. 06 …. 0.2000 …. 080 …….... 100 …. 050 ………………………………. 005 …………………….. Z223.7 …….….... no flip ..
…. 07 …. 0.2333 …. 070 ……….. 100 …. 100 …………………….………. 000 …………………….. Z224.3 …….. flipped ..
…. 08 …. 0.2667 …. 060 ……….. 100 …. 100 ………………………….…. 000 …………………….. Z224.9 …….. flipped ..
…. 09 …. 0.3000 …. 050 ……... 100 …. 100 …………………………….. 000 ……………….….…. Z225.4 …….. flipped ..
…. 10 …. 0.3333 …. 040 ……... 100 …. 080 …………………………….. 000 ……………….……. Z225.9 …….. flipped ..
…. 11 …. 0.3667 …. 030 ………. 100 …. 050 …………………………….. 000 ……………….…... Z226.8 …….. flipped ..
…. 12 …. 0.4000 …. 020 ………. 100 …. 030 ……………………………. 000 ……….…………... Z227.3 ……...….. blurred frame ..
…. 13 …. 0.4333 …. 020 ……... 080 …. 020 ……………………………... 000 ……….………….. Z227.9 ……...….. blurred frame..
…. 14 …. 0.4667 …. 010 ……... 050 …. 010 ……………………………... 000 …………….……. Z228.4 …….. hidden ..
…. 15 …. 0.5000 …. 010 ……... 030 …. 005 …………………….……….. 000 …………….….…. Z229.2 …….. hidden ..
…. 16 …. 0.5333 …. 000 ………. 020 …. 000 ……………….….…………. 000 …………….……. Z229.8 …….. hidden ..
…. 17 …. 0.5667 …. 000 ……... 010 …. 000 …………………..…………. 000 …………….……. Z2230.3 …….. hidden ..
…. …. …. 0.6000 …. ……. ……... …... …. …... …………………..…………. ..... …………….……. Z231.0 …….. hidden ..
In the above analysis we can see that the max lapel flip happens at frame07 2 frames after the jacket bulge starts to diminish at frame05.
Latimer's frames are at 30 fps. So, 2 such Lattimer frames would have an interval of 1/15th of a sec. Which is similar to the interval (1/9th sec) between Z222 & Z224.
Mystery solved.
Z222 shows us mainly jacket bulge, plus a little bit of upper-lapel flip.
Z224 shows us mainly a large upper-lapel flip, plus some jacket bulge.
« Last Edit: December 01, 2023, 04:06:49 AM by Marjan Rynkiewicz »

Online Marjan Rynkiewicz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1043
Re: The lapel flip -- what did i miss?
« Reply #78 on: December 03, 2023, 10:02:24 AM »
Today i was looking for Carcano gelatin tests.
I found one web-site that said that a Carcano veers more (in gelatin) if it is a round-nose rather than a pointed-nose (Oswald's slugs were round-nose).
Another site said that a pointed-nose veers more (in say gelatin), koz the slug is tail heavy.
And that site said that a pointed-nose veered more if it had aluminium filler inside the point rather than lead filler (& it said that this use of aluminium filler goes back many years)(before 1963 i think).

There might have been a mention that a pointed-nose is less stable in the air (ie tumbles at long range), & especially if the point is filled with aluminium.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2023, 10:05:08 AM by Marjan Rynkiewicz »

Online John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5120
Re: The lapel flip -- what did i miss?
« Reply #79 on: December 03, 2023, 10:49:03 PM »
The shot through the jacket/torso model made by Lattimer looks nothing like what is seen in any of the Zapruder frames.   

C'mon Andrew, are you sure they're "nothing alike"?
I see the top part of Connally's jacket move forward and create the same shape as seen in Lattimer's recreation and then the after effects are obscured by Connally's raised arm.
Consider Connally's positioning as to where the camera is and also Connally was seated which makes the bottom of the jacket compress into your lap and thus applies differing forces to the jacket.
In addition look at the right side of Connally's white shirt collar and how the jacket when hit rises and momentarily hides the white part, just like Lattimers recreation.





JohnM
« Last Edit: December 03, 2023, 11:54:43 PM by John Mytton »

Online John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5120
Re: The lapel flip -- what did i miss?
« Reply #80 on: December 04, 2023, 12:30:21 AM »
Very good observation, John. The jacket pluck 223ff is consistent with the Lattimer experiment.



On the right, the flag bulge pulls material from the right edge, maybe like how Connally's jacket edge supposedly moves between Z222 and Z223. Pretty sure Mason could afford a Carcano and perform an experiment, rather than nitpicking at Lattimer's.

Andrew also charges there's no blood visible "exploding from the chest". But at that resolution would blood be apparent against a dark surface?



Thanks Jerry, I've seen a number of excuses that try and explain away the lapel flip, like how at that exact fraction of a second the wind blew which effected nothing else besides Connally's jacket? Or there is a weird shadow? Or a fault in the Zapruder film? All ridiculous!

I like Andrew's passion but I think he is too wedded to his theory which clouds the way he perceives the evidence.

JohnM


Offline Chris Davidson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 184
Re: The lapel flip -- what did i miss?
« Reply #81 on: December 04, 2023, 03:01:28 PM »

Online Andrew Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1650
    • SPMLaw
Re: The lapel flip -- what did i miss?
« Reply #82 on: December 04, 2023, 04:14:34 PM »
Yes, there is a small movement of the lapel outwards in Z222, i hadnt noticed.
And, yes, the lapel seems to have moved back inwards in Z223 (& then we have the full blown flip outwards in Z224).
I dont know how the upper lapel could flip out then in then out in the space of 3 frames.
However, my posting detailing the timings in Lattimer's 18 frames duz show the upper lapel & lower lapel doing different things. I will have to think about it.
While you are thinking about it it you might ask yourself how does the jacket bulge out but not the shirt or the tie?  The tie does not move at all. 
Quote
In 1963 the outshoot was below the level of the side of the limo, hence the cloud of steam & debris could not be seen in Zapruder.
U are correct that the lapel flips between Z223 & Z224.
But u cant say that that is different to Lattimer. We cant see what the lapel duz after Z226 (frame too blurry)(lapel hidden by arm/hand).

I think that Lattimer did not tell us anything about how much debris was found inside shirt & inside jacket in 1994.
And i dont know how much debris was found in 1963.

Here is the shirt:


Not that much blood there and there would be a less hitting the jacket.  Lattimer proved that the bullet itself cannot cause the jacket to bulge. 

Online Andrew Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1650
    • SPMLaw
Re: The lapel flip -- what did i miss?
« Reply #83 on: December 04, 2023, 04:33:52 PM »
C'mon Andrew, are you sure they're "nothing alike"?
I see the top part of Connally's jacket move forward and create the same shape as seen in Lattimer's recreation and then the after effects are obscured by Connally's raised arm.
A few of the differences:
1.  There is no blast of bodily tissue that we see in Lattimer's film.  It was that blast of stuff of whatever Lattimer was using for a body that caused the jacket in Lattimer's film to fly out.  He could not get it to bulge out without it.
2.  There is no movement of any underlying shirt.  If the shirt moved, the tie would have to move. There is no movement of the tie at all.
3.  The bulge in Lattimer took several frames to develop. That is because the jacket can't move as fast as the bullet or exploding tissue. In the Zfilm the change occurs over one frame. That is consistent with the arm and torso motion that is beginning there and continues in subsequent frames.
4.  In Lattimer's demo there is no motion of the torso or arm occurring at the same time as the jacket motion.  There is in the zfilm.
5.  In Lattimer's case, the bullet exited under the lapel.  In Connally's case, it exited through the jacket pocket, not the lapel.

Quote
Consider Connally's positioning as to where the camera is and also Connally was seated which makes the bottom of the jacket compress into your lap and thus applies differing forces to the jacket.
In addition look at the right side of Connally's white shirt collar and how the jacket when hit rises and momentarily hides the white part, just like Lattimers recreation.
How does the jacket bulge but not the shirt?  If the shirt bulged, the tie would have to move. It doesn't.

And how do you explain the difference between z222 and z223?