The shot sequence, bang......bang......bang?

[Jack Nessan]

Altgens said:
I made one picture at the time I heard a noise that sounded like a firecracker--I did not know it was a shot, but evidently my picture, as I recall, and it was almost simultaneously with the shot? the shot was just a fraction ahead of my picture, but that much---of course at that time I figured it was nothing more than a firecracker, because from my position down here the sound was not of such volume that it would indicate to me it was a high-velocity rifle.


Altgens said his picture was taken almost simultaneously with the first shot. That alone make it sound like the two events were almost together, within a second of each other.

In addition, he clarifies this (with a mistake) by saying it was just a fraction ahead of his picture.

Question:

1.   What kind of units is Altgens talking about when he said ?fraction?. Units of weight? Units of Length? It?s units of time, correct?

2.   What unit of time would he be referring to? A fraction of a minute? A fraction of a fortnight? It has to be a fraction of a second, right?


People, particularly if they are a little nervous, making an official statement in front of others, often skip words. While Altgens didn?t say ?fraction of a second?, that has to be what he meant. The shot occurred with a fraction, almost simultaneously with his picture, just like the pictures taken by Betzner and Willis. But we know those pictures were all spread of several seconds, so one of them, perhaps all three, were wrong.

All three were right. That is correct, he pictures were spread over the very small time of several seconds and that is what their statements indicate, before the shot, at the time of the shot, and after the shot.

These eyewitnesses, including James Altgens, all state the same thing. The only issue being raised seems to be Altgen's choice of words in trying to describe how quick the whole assassination took place, not whether the shot took place before he took the picture.

Obviously the main issue with eyewitness statements is the fact they do not support the idea there was an early missed shot in any form. The theory there was an early missed shot is what is wrong not the witnesses. The time frame of the assassination was approximately five seconds and the cycle time of the carcano was 2.3 seconds and the mechanics of the assassination need to be explained with those parameters in mind.

[John Anderson]

There are indeed witnesses talking about an early shot as shown in this very thread. Regardless of what we each choose to believe it involves discounting some of the witnesses. They can't all be right.

[Joe Elliott]

Many people on the sidewalk in front of the TSBD heard the shots as "firecrackers". By the time Altgens snapped his photo at z255, the onlookers had still not reacted to two rifle shots, despite the facts they were very close to the rifle AND the muzzle of the rifle was pointing toward them.

No.

The people under the sniper?s nest, 60 feet below, near the southeast corner of the building, were 60 degrees away from where the rifle was pointing. The bullet might pass right over their heads, about 60 feet above their heads, but in 3-D space the rifle was off of their position by 60 degrees. The rifle was not pointing in their general direction, almost straight down, but only 30 degrees below the horizon.


The people along the north side of the street near where the limousine was at z152 (see the map below):

http://content.invisioncic.com/r16296/monthly_2017_11/5a1653a2b6d50_DealeyPlazaDetailedMap112217.gif.368da7d606dfb2a91ee3af598949031f.gif

would have the shot muffled by the tree, which blocks the line of sight from the sniper?s nest to the sidewalk more than it does the center of the street.


And even if we ignore the effect of the tree, ignore that the rifle was not pointed within a few feet of them, the sound of the rifle from 45 yards away would be no louder than a firecracker 10 yards away. And for all they knew, someone had set off a firecracker.


Also, we should not forget that the Carcano is not one of the louder rifles. I understand it is not nearly as loud as some. As to be expected from a rifle that fires bullets that travel around 2100 feet per second as opposed to 2800 feet per second. So, while 163 db may be a good estimate for an average rifle, the Carcano was probably less loud than this.

Are you aware how much louder a rifle is if you are ahead of the muzzle, as opposed to standing behind the shooter?

Yes. 163 db. When the muzzle is pointed in the general direction of the observer.

Which is why a much larger firecracker is only 150 db, but a much smaller bullet can produce a much louder noise. Provided the rifle is pointed in the general direction of the observer.

And it is important to remember that in 1963, much more powerful firecrackers were legal then the ones you can legally buy today.



Even in an ?ideal? situation (ideal for hearing a loud noise) with the rifle pointed nearly at the observer, a rifle 90 yards away will only be as loud as a firecracker that is 20 yards away. And a rifle that is 45 yards away can only be as loud as a firecracker that is 10 yards away.

So, it won?t be obvious to an observer, at least one not experienced at being fired at with rifles, from the loudness alone, if they are hearing a firecracker or a rifle from four times further away.

Why did the onlookers in front of the TSBD not display instantaneous startle reactions, as would be expected of people exposed to 163 dB? Why did many of them describe a deafening muzzle blast as a firecracker?

The people who were close, within 60 feet, did not have the rifle pointed in their general direction.

The people who did have the rifle pointed in their general direction, were not that close, but 45 yards away (at z153). And, unless standing in the middle of the street, had a tree between them and the rifle, which would muffle the sound to some degree.

[Jack Nessan]

No.

The people under the sniper?s nest, 60 feet below, near the southeast corner of the building, were 60 degrees away from where the rifle was pointing. The bullet might pass right over their heads, about 60 feet above their heads, but in 3-D space the rifle was off of their position by 60 degrees. The rifle was not pointing in their general direction, almost straight down, but only 30 degrees below the horizon.


The people along the north side of the street near where the limousine was at z152 (see the map below):

http://content.invisioncic.com/r16296/monthly_2017_11/5a1653a2b6d50_DealeyPlazaDetailedMap112217.gif.368da7d606dfb2a91ee3af598949031f.gif

would have the shot muffled by the tree, which blocks the line of sight from the sniper?s nest to the sidewalk more than it does the center of the street.


And even if we ignore the effect of the tree, ignore that the rifle was not pointed within a few feet of them, the sound of the rifle from 45 yards away would be no louder than a firecracker 10 yards away. And for all they knew, someone had set off a firecracker.


Also, we should not forget that the Carcano is not one of the louder rifles. I understand it is not nearly as loud as some. As to be expected from a rifle that fires bullets that travel around 2100 feet per second as opposed to 2800 feet per second. So, while 163 db may be a good estimate for an average rifle, the Carcano was probably less loud than this.


Yes. 163 db. When the muzzle is pointed in the general direction of the observer.

Which is why a much larger firecracker is only 150 db, but a much smaller bullet can produce a much louder noise. Provided the rifle is pointed in the general direction of the observer.

And it is important to remember that in 1963, much more powerful firecrackers were legal then the ones you can legally buy today.



Even in an ?ideal? situation (ideal for hearing a loud noise) with the rifle pointed nearly at the observer, a rifle 90 yards away will only be as loud as a firecracker that is 20 yards away. And a rifle that is 45 yards away can only be as loud as a firecracker that is 10 yards away.

So, it won?t be obvious to an observer, at least one not experienced at being fired at with rifles, from the loudness alone, if they are hearing a firecracker or a rifle from four times further away.



The people who were close, within 60 feet, did not have the rifle pointed in their general direction.

The people who did have the rifle pointed in their general direction, were not that close, but 45 yards away (at z153). And, unless standing in the middle of the street, had a tree between them and the rifle, which would muffle the sound to some degree.

  "The buildings around the Plaza caused strong reverberations
or echoes that followed the initial sound by from 0.5 to 1.5 sec.
While these reflections caused no confusion to our listeners
who were prepared and expected to hear them they may well
inflated the number of shots reported by the suprised witnesses
during the assassination" HSCA Earwitness Analysis Report, pgs 135-137



"We requested three motorcycles to be running during the test
to provide someback groundnoise that would approximate the orig
inal listening conditions in Dealey Plaza. Unfortunately these
newer motorcycles were not very noisy but the shots were so
loud that any reasonable level of background noise would have
been low in comparison with the shots themselves." HSCA Earwitness Analysis Report, pg 146

"All observers rated the rifle shots as very, very loud and
they were unable to understand how they could have been described
as a firecracker or backfire." HSCA Earwitness Analysis Report, pg 148

[Jack Nessan]

There are indeed witnesses talking about an early shot as shown in this very thread. Regardless of what we each choose to believe it involves discounting some of the witnesses. They can't all be right.

Name them.

[Joe Elliott]

"We requested three motorcycles to be running during the test
to provide someback groundnoise that would approximate the orig
inal listening conditions in Dealey Plaza. Unfortunately these
newer motorcycles were not very noisy but the shots were so
loud that any reasonable level of background noise would have
been low in comparison with the shots themselves." HSCA Earwitness Analysis Report, pg 146

Question: Did they run the acoustic tests with early 1960?s motorcycles?

Answer: No. They just assumed an early 1960?s motorcycle, having backfires


As the report says, early 1960?s motorcycles were louder than the mid 1970?s motorcycles. Much more prone to backfires, which are particularly loud to people within a few yards of the motorcycles.


In any case, some witnesses reported that they thought they were hearing backfires (indeed, throughout the motorcade, they did hear real backfires). And later realized that those were actually shots. So, it is possible for witnesses to mistake shots for backfires, regardless of what the HSCA experts thought.

"All observers rated the rifle shots as very, very loud and
they were unable to understand how they could have been described
as a firecracker or backfire." HSCA Earwitness Analysis Report, pg 148

Question: In the 1970?s HSCA test, did they set off some early 1960?s era firecrackers, and test to see how loud people thought those sounded compared to the recreated gunshots?

Answer: No. They just assumed that the firecrackers would never sound as loud. Even if the firecrackers were set off within 10 to 20 yards of an observer.


In any case, some witnesses reported that they thought they were hearing firecrackers. And later realized that those were actually shots. So, it is possible for witnesses to mistake shots for firecrackers, regardless of what the HSCA experts thought.

[Gary Craig]

?Motorcade Cop Tells How It Happened,? Sunday News (New York)
, 24 November 1963, p.25:

Dallas, Nov. 23 (Special) - B. W. Hargis, 31, Dallas motorcycle patrolman who was riding
in President Kennedy?s motorcade, gave this account today of the assassination:
 
?We turned left onto Elm St. off Houston, about half a block from where it happened. I was

right alongside the rear fender on the left hand side of the President?s car, near Mrs. Kennedy.
 
When I heard the first explosion, I knew it was a shot. I thought that Gov. Connally had

been hit when I saw him turn toward the President with a real surprised look.

The President then looked like he was bent over or that he was leaning toward the Governor,

talking to him.
 
As the President straightened back up, Mrs. Kennedy turned toward him, and that was when he

got hit in the side of his head, spinning it around.

I was splattered with blood.
 
Then I felt something hit me. It could have been concrete or something, but I thought at first I

might have been hit.

Then I saw the limousine stop, and I parked my motorcycle at the side of the road, got off and

drew my gun.
 
Then this Secret Service agent (in the President?s car) got his wits about him and they took off.

The motorcycle officer on the right side of the car was Jim Chaney. He immediately went forward

and announced to the chief that the President had been shot.?

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

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=35&relPageId=304

Mr. Hargis: I was at the left-hand side of the Presidential Limousine.
Mr. Stern: Riding next to Mrs. Kennedy?
Mr. Hargis: Right.

....Well at the time it sounded like the shots were right next to me. There wasn't
anyway in the world I could tell where they were coming from but at the time there
was something in my head that said that they probably could have been coming from the
 railroad overpass, because I thought since I had got splattered with blood-I was just
a little back and left of-just a little back and left of Mrs. Kennedy, but I didn't know.
I had a feeling that it might have been from the Texas Book Depository. and these places
was the primary place that could have been shot from....

....I ran across the street looking over towards the railroad overpass and I remembered
seeing people scattering and running and then I looked--...

.....and then I looked over to the Texas School Book Depository Building, and no one that
was standing at the base of the building was--seemed to be looking up at the building or
anything like they knew where the shots were coming from, so.....

.....Well, then, I thought since I had looked over at the Texas Book Depository and some
people looking out of the windows up there, didn't seem like they knew what was going on,
but none of them were looking towards or near anywhere the shots had been fired from.....

[Jack Nessan]

Question: Did they run the acoustic tests with early 1960?s motorcycles?

Answer: No. They just assumed an early 1960?s motorcycle, having backfires


As the report says, early 1960?s motorcycles were louder than the mid 1970?s motorcycles. Much more prone to backfires, which are particularly loud to people within a few yards of the motorcycles.


In any case, some witnesses reported that they thought they were hearing backfires (indeed, throughout the motorcade, they did hear real backfires). And later realized that those were actually shots. So, it is possible for witnesses to mistake shots for backfires, regardless of what the HSCA experts thought.



Question: In the 1970?s HSCA test, did they set off some early 1960?s era firecrackers, and test to see how loud people thought those sounded compared to the recreated gunshots?

Answer: No. They just assumed that the firecrackers would never sound as loud. Even if the firecrackers were set off within 10 to 20 yards of an observer.


In any case, some witnesses reported that they thought they were hearing firecrackers. And later realized that those were actually shots. So, it is possible for witnesses to mistake shots for firecrackers, regardless of what the HSCA experts thought.

Looks like one more example of the witnesses being wrong.  In this case these are people specifically placed there to observe the sounds and note them. Under what circumstances are witnesses correct?

Obviously with your extensive knowledge of a carcano rifle and 1960 motorcycle sounds you know what the witnesses hear.