Ballistic Calculator

[Joe Elliott]

. . .

------------------------------

Mr. Eisenberg.
How did he do with the iron sight on the third target?

Mr. Simmons.
On the third target he missed the boards completely. And we have not checked this out. It appears that for the
firing posture which Mr. Miller--Specialist Miller uses, the iron sight is not zeroed for him, since his impacts
on the first and second targets were quite high, and against the third target we would assume that the projectile
went over the top of the target, which extended only a few inches over the top of the silhouette.

---------------------------

. . .

Yes, but Specialist Miller had very little experience firing Carcano rifles, probably a lot less than Oswald had. And he had never used the iron sights on a Carcano before. He probably did not know that the Carcano would miss high by 3.2, 4.7 and 5.5 inches at 43, 63 and 88 yards.

Most rifles fire a bullet at around 2000 MPH, but the Carcano fired at 1400 MPH. This means the rifle has to be aimed at a higher angle to hit a target at 200 meters, then it would with a different rifle. I don’t think that Specialist Miller would have been aware of this.

As I recall, now that Specialist Miller was made aware of how high the Carcano shot at a target at 88 yards, he wanted another try but they did not allow him to try again. They wanted to limit the use of Oswald’s rifle to keep it in the same condition as the time of the assassination, as much as possible.

Even so, if the target Specialist Miller was aiming at had been moving at the same distance, angle and speed as the limousine at z312, the target would have risen 3.7 inches by the time the bullet arrived. Resulting not in a miss of 5.5 inches high, as at a stationary target, but of a miss of 5.5 – 3.7 or 1.8 inches, and he would have hit the target.

[Gary Craig]

Yes, but Specialist Miller had very little experience firing Carcano rifles, probably a lot less than Oswald had. And he had never used the iron sights on a Carcano before. He probably did not know that the Carcano would miss high by 3.2, 4.7 and 5.5 inches at 43, 63 and 88 yards.

Most rifles fire a bullet at around 2000 MPH, but the Carcano fired at 1400 MPH. This means the rifle has to be aimed at a higher angle to hit a target at 200 meters, then it would with a different rifle. I don’t think that Specialist Miller would have been aware of this.

As I recall, now that Specialist Miller was made aware of how high the Carcano shot at a target at 88 yards, he wanted another try but they did not allow him to try again. They wanted to limit the use of Oswald’s rifle to keep it in the same condition as the time of the assassination, as much as possible.

Even so, if the target Specialist Miller was aiming at had been moving at the same distance, angle and speed as the limousine at z312, the target would have risen 3.7 inches by the time the bullet arrived. Resulting not in a miss of 5.5 inches high, as at a stationary target, but of a miss of 5.5 – 3.7 or 1.8 inches, and he would have hit the target.

"Yes, but Specialist Miller had very little experience firing Carcano rifles, probably a lot less than Oswald had.'

Miller was a Master Marksman who was actively competing and training.

The WC's self critique of it's evaluation of LHO's rifle capability on the other hand.

[Charles Collins]

"Yes, but Specialist Miller had very little experience firing Carcano rifles, probably a lot less than Oswald had.'

Miller was a Master Marksman who was actively competing and training.

The WC's self critique of it's evaluation of LHO's rifle capability on the other hand.

One misconception that I see written in the above linked critique, and repeated in arguments, is the need to zero-in the scope after a period of non-use. While it is something that is often done by hunters and competition shooters, it isn’t necessary (especially for the short-distance shot requirements in Dealey Plaza). Weather extremes can sometimes make a slight difference (less than 1-inch at 100-yards). Changing the type of ammunition is a good reason to zero-in a scope because of the differences in the ammo, etc. But some folks would have us believe that unless the scope was zeroed-in just before the assassination, that no one could hit the broadside of a barn with it. That is nonsense.

[Gary Craig]

One misconception that I see written in the above linked critique, and repeated in arguments, is the need to zero-in the scope after a period of non-use. While it is something that is often done by hunters and competition shooters, it isn’t necessary (especially for the short-distance shot requirements in Dealey Plaza). Weather extremes can sometimes make a slight difference (less than 1-inch at 100-yards). Changing the type of ammunition is a good reason to zero-in a scope because of the differences in the ammo, etc. But some folks would have us believe that unless the scope was zeroed-in just before the assassination, that no one could hit the broadside of a barn with it. That is nonsense.

That's not exactly the point the critique is making about the reason the scope on the TSBD Carcano needed to be sighted in.

"You can't leave a rifle and scope laying around in a garage underfoot for almost 3 months,
just having brought it back from New Orleans in the back of a station wagon, and expect
to hit anything with it, unless you take the trouble to fire it and sight the scope in."

In addition the official story claims LHO broke the rifle down and carried it to work in a paper sack, then used a dime to to reassemble it. That in itself would have compromised it's accuracy.

[Charles Collins]

That's not exactly the point the critique is making about the reason the scope on the TSBD Carcano needed to be sighted in.

"You can't leave a rifle and scope laying around in a garage underfoot for almost 3 months,
just having brought it back from New Orleans in the back of a station wagon, and expect
to hit anything with it, unless you take the trouble to fire it and sight the scope in."

In addition the official story claims LHO broke the rifle down and carried it to work in a paper sack, then used a dime to to reassemble it. That in itself would have compromised it's accuracy.

Neither one of those two statements have any merit whatsoever. They are used to try to mislead people who don’t know any better.

[Gary Craig]

Neither one of those two statements have any merit whatsoever. They are used to try to mislead people who don’t know any better.

 Charles, the only one who is attempting to mislead those who don't know any better is you.

From Wesley J. Liebeler, one of the Warren Commission's senior attorney?:

"You can't leave a rifle and scope laying around in a garage underfoot for almost 3 months,
just having brought it back from New Orleans in the back of a station wagon, and expect
to hit anything with it, unless you take the trouble to fire it and sight the scope in."

My statement from personal experience:

"In addition the official story claims LHO broke the rifle down and carried it to work in a paper sack, then used a dime to to reassemble it. That in itself would have compromised it's accuracy."

[Charles Collins]

Charles, the only one who is attempting to mislead those who don't know any better is you.

From Wesley J. Liebeler, one of the Warren Commission's senior attorney?:

"You can't leave a rifle and scope laying around in a garage underfoot for almost 3 months,
just having brought it back from New Orleans in the back of a station wagon, and expect
to hit anything with it, unless you take the trouble to fire it and sight the scope in."

My statement from personal experience:

"In addition the official story claims LHO broke the rifle down and carried it to work in a paper sack, then used a dime to to reassemble it. That in itself would have compromised it's accuracy."

Liebeler is wrong. People do it regularly.

Tell us all about your personal experience. Exactly what parts have you disassembled on the rifle that compromised it’s accuracy?

[Joe Elliott]

"Yes, but Specialist Miller had very little experience firing Carcano rifles, probably a lot less than Oswald had.'

Miller was a Master Marksman who was actively competing and training.

Yes, but not with the Carcano rifle. The first time he ever used the iron sights of a Carcano rifle, was when he fired the three shots, all of which went high, particularly the third shot. Exactly as to be expected of a rifleman who can line up the iron sights with the target, but does not know that the Carcano will miss high by 5.7 inches at 88 yards.

Being an expert rifleman, as Specialist Miller was, does not mean that he can shoot accurately with all rifles, including the ones he has no experience with. With any expert rifleman, he has to be allowed to become acquainted with his weapon first, before he can demonstrate proficiency with it.

Expecting Specialist Miller to do well with the Carcano, or any rifle he is unfamiliar with, is like expecting the winner of the Indianapolis 500, an expert in driving Indy style racecars, to place in the top three that year’s Monte Carlo race, driving a Formula 1 racecar, of which he is totally unfamiliar with and has never driven until the day of the race when he dashes up and jumps into his Formula 1 racecar and starts it up, assuming he can figure out how to do so.