Oswald took 10.2 seconds to fire all three shots.

[Andrew Mason]

I don’t have Thompson’s latest book, but if I’m not mistaken Thompson believes there were 4 shots, now having the last one fired from the Depository striking around z327.

I had to look back at my notes, but what I was referring to was related to the graph of Thompson’s data sourced from his first book, Six Seconds in Dallas, p.25, where he tabulated the number of shots. Awhile back I had used that data along with related data provided by BBN to the HSCA (report 4043), to look at what were the number of shots summarized for/by the folks who claimed there were at least 4 shots taken with one from the grassy knoll.

What bothered me at the time was that the HSCA had a report on the number of shots, but really didn’t seem to mention it, and rather chose to made the big splash with the statement from data on the acoustic static, where you could hear no shots, but claimed there was about a 95 probability that there were 4 shots. Both the HSCA and Thompson agree on 4 shots.

However both of their shot data summaries indicate, when tabulated to compare < 4 shots to > 4 shots, that nearly 95% of their reported witness data who reported audibly hearing shots, reported less than 4 shots. What it appears the HSCA concluded to do was to promote the diametric opposite of what the shot count data they had in hand indicated.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1aHTdtI3rELdqrwSJZSPqZooEQ5Ctz8HC/view?usp=sharing

I haven't seen his latest book either.  But Thompson concluded in his book "Six Seconds in Dallas" that the last two shots occurred at exactly the same time (z312-z313 and z312-314) from different locations so that is how he explains that most heard only three shots.  This might be a handy reference (Six Seconds in Dallas at p. 137):

[Charles Collins]

There seems to be some confusion about the minimum limo miss at ~ z124 I have been talking about and the traffic mast causing the miss at ~z107.

The minimum limo miss is described at this link below with the middle picture representing the limo at ~z124.
 
At this point the limo has significantly passed the traffic mast. This type of minimum miss strike location also matched what Faye Chism said.

This link below was used to estimate the instantaneous rifle deviation, i.e. how far off from being perfectly aimed using the iron sights it would momentarily have to be off target to miss the limo, when the first shot missing the president’s head was estimated at 36”. The picture at the top was found to just to help convey the geometry of the measurement points. The result was that the aim only had to be off target by about a half an inch to miss the limo.

I later made an estimate using oa at 107 ft to get some angle estimates. If it helps, one estimate of the angle down from horizontal at the sniper nest to the trajectory going to limo was about 33.7 deg, and upwards from ground/limo to the nest would be about 32.8  deg.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hZEgKoRdXBBpzrLArLUZh9JsNA3oIE_E/view?usp=sharing

Thanks Brian, yes I used the Roberdeau map which is a straight down view that shows the line from the window to the Z124 position crossing the traffic light. However, that is not the same as a view from the sniper’s window. My mistake. Thanks for the correction.

I also misspoke regarding what angle I was describing when I said down from level at the sniper’s nest window to the limo. I should have said up from straight (vertically) down. I was also only considering how far away from the building (perpendicular to the south wall) in an effort to find the difference required in aiming the Z133 shot versus the Z124 shot. So this wasn’t an effort to be anything other than a rough idea. Here is how it calculated using only a perpendicular distance from the building where 60’ is the height of the window above the street and 71’ is the horizontal distance from the building:




I suppose I should have used both the perpendicular distances and the distances down the street to the the actual distances. If I had done that I think that it should have been ~75’ for the Z124 shot, and ~81’ for the Z133 shot. Again these are only for a rough idea and not intended to be totally accurate.

[Brian Roselle]

I haven't seen his latest book either.  But Thompson concluded in his book "Six Seconds in Dallas" that the last two shots occurred at exactly the same time (z312-z313 and z312-314) from different locations so that is how he explains that most heard only three shots.  This might be a handy reference (Six Seconds in Dallas at p. 137):

That is a good summary, Thanks.

I did not recall he had 3 shooters in his early tally. I now wonder if the San Franciso Chronicle article I referenced earlier was right when saying 5 shots with 3 shooters. His current scenario may still be 4 shots with 3 shooters where he just moved the TSBD head shot from 313 to around z327 now making it the last shot in “The Last Second in Dallas”.

I see his first shot noted at around z210 was consistent with what the Warren Commission favored, but didn’t make a firm conclusion on. It makes sense with the first book name. (313-210)/18.3 = 5.6 seconds or rounded off to “Six Seconds in Dallas”.

[Brian Roselle]

Thanks Brian, yes I used the Roberdeau map which is a straight down view that shows the line from the window to the Z124 position crossing the traffic light. However, that is not the same as a view from the sniper’s window. My mistake. Thanks for the correction.

I also misspoke regarding what angle I was describing when I said down from level at the sniper’s nest window to the limo. I should have said up from straight (vertically) down. I was also only considering how far away from the building (perpendicular to the south wall) in an effort to find the difference required in aiming the Z133 shot versus the Z124 shot. So this wasn’t an effort to be anything other than a rough idea. Here is how it calculated using only a perpendicular distance from the building where 60’ is the height of the window above the street and 71’ is the horizontal distance from the building:




I suppose I should have used both the perpendicular distances and the distances down the street to the the actual distances. If I had done that I think that it should have been ~75’ for the Z124 shot, and ~81’ for the Z133 shot. Again these are only for a rough idea and not intended to be totally accurate.

I know my measurements are necessarily estimates so are good for estimated, not exact, results.

How I made the estimates I gave you for the first shot may look a little different than yours, so there would be some variability expected. I used Google Earth Pro, which I think was free, to draw a 3D path option available.

Starting with a click at the snipers nest I went to the road around were I expected the bullet hit and clicked there. At each subsequent click it gives you a total path length so I then clicked on the base of the TSBD below the snipers nest and then back up to the snipers nest. This path method is supposed to give cumulative 3D distances along the path or triangle sides here, and using distances in the same manner you did, I used the triangle side lengths in https://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/geometry-plane/triangle-law-of-cosines.php in case paths I draw don’t have a right angle in them.

The clicks may be off a little, but I believe the method is accurate enough to get close. If I ever find out otherwise, I will change methods. For the picture here the path lengths it came back with were 107.2 ft direct bullet flight, 89.52 ft from there back to the base of the building, and 58.1 ft. back up to to the start just below the window to basically close the triangle.

[James Hackerott]

I tested James’ virtual model’s position in my actual model that I can personally be in and aim a rifle with similar dimensions to the Carcano found on the sixth floor of the TSBD. The results are:

1.  If I kneel on my left knee up close to or against the box below the window and lean towards the metal conduit and the window, I can see the Z133 target similar to what James’ model shows.

2.  When I try to aim the rifle at the Z133 target, it places the butt of the stock well above my right shoulder (similar to how the line of sight goes well above James’ models’ right shoulder.

3. Therefore, for me, it was impossible to get my eye over the top of the stock and inline with the sights on the rifle. So, I do not see this idea as a realistic possibility.

4. As I have said before, standing straight up (no awkward leaning is needed) and aiming the rifle at the Z133 target works. But the issues with the standing idea are that it is significantly less stable than a seated and supported position. Also, it takes time to reposition to a seated position from a standing position. And the space available between the stacks of boxes is very limited which makes the process of repositioning even slower and more awkward. Plus the descriptions from witnesses who said they saw him just seconds before the shots all indicate he was seated (even if one of them did assume otherwise). When sitting in the actual model it becomes obvious how comfortable the seated (on the seat box) position shots (during the time after the limo emerges from behind the tree) are. And that the design of the nest was apparently made for those shots. If you do not believe me on this point, please, please, please, make one for yourself and I believe you will then agree.

Charles, thank you for your input.  I don't have a 3D rifle model and even if I did it would be very difficult to place and manipulate in the hands of my model action figures. I made a temporary scope and placed it 2” above and parallel with the bore line-of- sight. Then I could articulate the model such that the scope would meet with the right eye. Unfortunately, that was not enough to guarantee the butt of the rifle was reasonably positioned or even if the eye had a clean view through the scope. I really appreciate your help and am glad you were able to use your physical model to help with this thread.

[Charles Collins]

Charles, thank you for your input.  I don't have a 3D rifle model and even if I did it would be very difficult to place and manipulate in the hands of my model action figures. I made a temporary scope and placed it 2” above and parallel with the bore line-of- sight. Then I could articulate the model such that the scope would meet with the right eye. Unfortunately, that was not enough to guarantee the butt of the rifle was reasonably positioned or even if the eye had a clean view through the scope. I really appreciate your help and am glad you were able to use your physical model to help with this thread.

Thanks James, that makes sense to me. This discussion is a good example of why I wanted to build the actual model and be in it with a rifle in hand.

I have been starting to look at the Roberdeau map’s position of JFK at Z133. Currently it appears to me to be off a few feet from where the photographic record indicates. Do you or anyone else know when the Willis 4 slide was exposed as related to Z133? Willis 4 seems to me to be taken very close to Z133. But I would like to hear from some others regarding this.

[James Hackerott]

40.2 inches

Tom, I was working on this this morning when I saw Charles' attempt to reproduce my Z124H frame 3D implied positioning of a rifle proved my model was not realistic. In short, my model would put the butt of the rifle well above the right shoulder. So, determining if the rifle was in or out of the building is moot. Sorry.

[Charles Collins]

I know my measurements are necessarily estimates so are good for estimated, not exact, results.

How I made the estimates I gave you for the first shot may look a little different than yours, so there would be some variability expected. I used Google Earth Pro, which I think was free, to draw a 3D path option available.

Starting with a click at the snipers nest I went to the road around were I expected the bullet hit and clicked there. At each subsequent click it gives you a total path length so I then clicked on the base of the TSBD below the snipers nest and then back up to the snipers nest. This path method is supposed to give cumulative 3D distances along the path or triangle sides here, and using distances in the same manner you did, I used the triangle side lengths in https://www.calculatorsoup.com/calculators/geometry-plane/triangle-law-of-cosines.php in case paths I draw don’t have a right angle in them.

The clicks may be off a little, but I believe the method is accurate enough to get close. If I ever find out otherwise, I will change methods. For the picture here the path lengths it came back with were 107.2 ft direct bullet flight, 89.52 ft from there back to the base of the building, and 58.1 ft. back up to to the start just below the window to basically close the triangle.

Thanks Brian, that’s interesting. I have been studying the Roberdeau map’s position of Z133 compared to the photographs. I currently believe the Roberdeau map to be off a few feet. And I believe that that probably helps to explain some of the difference in our calculations.