03-05-2014, 11:33 PM
I found 2 Photos from NARA one with the barrel left, and one right. The barrel right photo has the yardstick in it. ( Well, not a real yardstick, but some sort of paper with inch markings on it.) Made extra measurements to determine accuracy. Since the scope is mounted at an angle to the vertical, and since I have no guarantee that the rifle is lying on the ground there in such a way as to be perpendicular to the camera, I can't be sure that my measurements find the maximum distance from the barrel line. But you can use them in an "at least" manner.
I also remember that there may have been more than one Oswald rifle in that photographs take of it differ from Warren Commission to Life Magazine...
Barrel to right: barrel length 21'' scope length 10.5" sight line higher than barrel line 1.56"
Barrel to left: barrel length 21" scope length 10.4" sight line higher than barrel line 1.65"
With pixilation, and measurement uncertainty, and angle that the gun is positioned uncertainty, I think its safe for you to conclude that the sight line is at least 1.5" higher in elevation than the bore line.
I also remember that there may have been more than one Oswald rifle in that photographs take of it differ from Warren Commission to Life Magazine...
Barrel to right: barrel length 21'' scope length 10.5" sight line higher than barrel line 1.56"
Barrel to left: barrel length 21" scope length 10.4" sight line higher than barrel line 1.65"
With pixilation, and measurement uncertainty, and angle that the gun is positioned uncertainty, I think its safe for you to conclude that the sight line is at least 1.5" higher in elevation than the bore line.