18-04-2014, 08:56 PM (This post was last modified: 18-04-2014, 09:50 PM by Drew Phipps.)
I went out and bought a 99 cent plastic protractor and measured the angle of the scratch created by lands/groove on the above photos of CE 399. I used the cannellure as a reference line, assuming that it is perpendicular to the long axis of the bullet. Just as I suspected, photos 3317 and 3319 show an angle of 84 degrees, and photos 3318 and 3320 show an angle of 86 degrees. Quite impossible for a single bullet.
from there, we can calculate the spin rate of each bullet IF WE ASSUME we know its diameter.
From Bob's research we have 2 possible bullet diameters (available in 1964): .268 inches (Italian mil spec) and .264 inches (WCC). I'm going to also throw in 6.5 mm ammo = .256 inches (because Frazier testifies that its the same, and also because it is the closest measurement to the average width measurement I got from averaging all 4 photos together in a previous post, when I pretended that all 4 pics were of the same bullet). I am also adding 8 mm (.315 inches) ammo (some of the 1938 carbines were converted to 8mm (Mauser) ammo) and 7.35 mm (.289 inches), the intended caliber of the 1938 short rifle. If I remember my high school trig correctly...
As you can see photos 3317 and 3319 are bullets that spin too fast (smaller ratio is a faster spin) to have been shot from the rechambered 91/38 short rifle, and must have fired from the carbine (if fired from a carcano at all), UNLESS the round is actually .289 (7.35 mm ammo) fired from a 1938 rifle. 3318 and 3320 spin too slowly to have been fired from the 91/38 short rifle with the standard barrel (or the carbine), but it might be possible to get these spins from a 91/38 with a sawed off progressive barrel. So we have 2 different bullets fired from 2 different guns and all 4 pictures kludged together by the FBI to masquerade as the single bullet.
Drew Phipps Wrote:Don't know if this is good news or bad, but this isn't the first time that this particular feat of trickery has been spotted. A gentleman with the unlikely name of Walt Cakebread, a former Navy man and gun enthusiast, looked at a published photo of the "magic bullet" (unknown if it was labeled CE 399 or not) in 1964 and concluded that there were 6 set of lands and grooves on the bullet, and determined that the spin rate was 1 / 7.37 inches. Knowing that wasn't right for a M-C 91/38, he shopped his observations around but wasn't taken seriously. 10 years later, the HSCA comes along and publishes a different pictures of the bullet (almost certainly by now labeled CE 399), and it shows a different pattern of lands and grooves! When Cakebread realizes that this meant that either the WC evidence was a forgery, or the HSCA evidence was, he again tried to interest researchers in it. He had no luck until he ran into author Jack White. Jack White examines all of the bullet photos and concludes that CE 399 has 5 sets of lands and grooves, and published a short article about it.
You can read all about Walt Cakebread and Jack White in the Harold Weisberg Archives (online). It appears that Harold used the article as "evidence" in support of one of his many FOIA lawsuits.
This is all new to me, although I have to admit I was a little surprised that no one else had noticed the peculiarities of CE 399 in the last 50 years. I can sympathize with Mr. Cakebread's (is that a real name?) inability to arouse any interest in the ballistics of this case. People seem to be far more fascinated with LHO's tonsils than the ballistics of the weapon allegedly used to kill JFK.
In your searching, have you found anyone pursuing the finer details of SA Robert Frazier's testimony to the WC?
Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head.
Warren Commission testimony of Secret Service Agent Clinton J. Hill, 1964
Bob Prudhomme Wrote:In your searching, have you found anyone pursuing the finer details of SA Robert Frazier's testimony to the WC?
I've re-read the WC testimony where Sen. McCord (the gun enthusiast) is asking Frazier about the measurements, so its apparent that there was early skepticism from folks who knew better.
My recollection is that Harold Wiesberg was early actively on Frazier's case. IIRC he eventually deposed Frazier via his attorney Lesar?, so that there should be a transcript of that deposition in his archives, but I've not read it. I seem to remember that Frazier and Gallagher and one other guy "retired" when Weisberg sued, so that Weisberg had to pay them witness fees. Weisberg's first couple of books (which I have asked for as a birthday gift) should produce some early data. I want to compare the photos that were published back then with the NARA stuff available today.
Drew Phipps Wrote:I went out and bought a 99 cent plastic protractor and measured the angle of the scratch created by lands/groove on the above photos of CE 399. I used the cannellure as a reference line, assuming that it is perpendicular to the long axis of the bullet. Just as I suspected, photos 3317 and 3319 show an angle of 84 degrees, and photos 3318 and 3320 show an angle of 86 degrees. Quite impossible for a single bullet.
from there, we can calculate the spin rate of each bullet IF WE ASSUME we know its diameter.
From Bob's research we have 2 possible bullet diameters (available in 1964): .268 inches (Italian mil spec) and .264 inches (WCC). I'm going to also throw in 6.5 mm ammo = .256 inches (because Frazier testifies that its the same, and also because it is the closest measurement to the average width measurement I got from averaging all 4 photos together in a previous post, when I pretended that all 4 pics were of the same bullet). I am also adding 8 mm (.315 inches) ammo (some of the 1938 carbines were converted to 8mm (Mauser) ammo) and 7.35 mm (.289 inches), the intended caliber of the 1938 short rifle. If I remember my high school trig correctly...
As you can see photos 3317 and 3319 are bullets that spin too fast (smaller ratio is a faster spin) to have been shot from the rechambered 91/38 short rifle, and must have fired from the carbine (if fired from a carcano at all), UNLESS the round is actually .289 (7.35 mm ammo) fired from a 1938 rifle. 3318 and 3320 spin too slowly to have been fired from the 91/38 short rifle with the standard barrel (or the carbine), but it might be possible to get these spins from a 91/38 with a sawed off progressive barrel. So we have 2 different bullets fired from 2 different guns and all 4 pictures kludged together by the FBI to masquerade as the single bullet.
I think another strong contender for the photo of CE 399 could be a .25 calibre bullet (.257" diameter), as many of Frazier's measurements would seem to correspond with a bullet of that calibre.
Interesting thought, regarding the M91/38 being made from a cut down M91 long rifle barrel with progressive twist rifling. I don't know whether or not you have read the thread I posted concerning the history of the short rifle so I will give you a brief synopsis.
The M38 short rifle made its debut in 1938. The 6.5x52mm cartridge was to be scrapped forever and to be replaced with the 7.35x51mm cartridge. Everything about the 6.5mm rifle (bolt, receiver, magazine, etc.) stayed the same in the new rifle, including the cartridge. Only the neck was expanded to accept the larger diameter bullet.
A radical idea was introduced into the 7.35mm bullet. First, the bullet was pointed instead of round nosed, inducing the bullet to tumble upon hitting bone and cause greater damage. Second, inside the jacket, the front third of the bullet was made of aluminum, instead of lead, while the rear two-thirds of the bullet was made from lead. This imbalance in mass between front and back end of this bullet further enhanced the tumbling effect, and made these bullets even more deadly. To understand where they got the idea for this bullet, Google the .303 British Mk. VII cartridge.
The thing that must be understood is that it was possible to effect all of these bullet changes to the 6.5x52mm cartridge, and be just as successful. There was no ballistic reason to go to a larger diameter bullet.
The reason it was decided to go to the 7.35mm calibre is that the Italians planned to cut the 31 inch barrels of worn out M91 long rifles down to 21 inches and recycle them as M38 short rifle barrels. Each cut down barrel would be bored out to a new bore diameter of 7.35 mm and this would effectively remove all traces of the 6.5mm rifling grooves. It was actually a very sound idea and, considering Italy's limited steel resources, freed up a lot of steel that could go into other weapons.
Below are two photos of 6.5mm Carcanos made prior to 1938.
As you will notice, there are five flat facets machined onto the base of the barrel, just behind the rear sight.
Below is a photo of a 7.35mm Carcano short rifle:
Notice the flat facets are absent and the chamber is now round in shape, and somewhat smaller than the pre-1938 chambers. Here are another two photos, one of them quite famous:
As it is an established fact that ALL 7.35mm barrels were cut down 31 inch M91 barrels, the only possibility that exists is that the barrels were put in a lathe and the flat facets machined down, leaving only a round chamber and effectively removing all stampings that would ID this barrel as an M91 barrel. In the photo above C2766, you can see where the machinist did not take quite enough metal off, leaving the forward points of the facets intact.
As they were, in effect, making an entirely new barrel and rifle, and not a re-work, they had every right to begin afresh with the stampings. However, the round shape of the chamber, which was retained even after the 7.35mm was discarded and the 6.5mm was brought back, opened up other possibilities.
When the 7.35mm M38 short rifle was discarded in 1939 and the 6.5mm M91/38 short rifle was introduced in 1940, it must be understood that it was no longer possible to recycle 31 inch M91 long rifle barrels (progressive twist) in their manufacture, as the M91/38 had standard twist rifling, and attempting to re-machine standard twist rifling over top of the M91 progressive twist rifling was impossible. It must also be understood that Italy began the manufacture of M91/38's in 1940 with NO 6.5mm short rifle barrels stockpiled, and they also declared war on the Allies in 1940. This declaration of war led to the immediate impounding of a good portion of Italy's merchant fleet in harbours around the world. As Italy's steel production was only a fraction of other European nations, a good part of their steel industry was dependent on imports.
Where did they get enough steel to make all of the new M91/38 short rifle barrels from, and still manage to supply steel to the remainder of their war effort? While many M91/38's were made with standard twist rifling, there are enough out there with progressive twist rifling to indicate that, some time in 1940, the supply of steel for short rifle barrels dried up, and the old practice of cutting down M91 long rifle barrels was revived; much to the detriment of short rifle accuracy. This could also explain why the M91/38 short rifle was abandoned at the end of 1940, and replaced with the all "new" M91/41 long rifle.
As can be seen in the photo of C2766, the chamber of this famous M91/38 has also been machined smooth and round. The only way to tell if this rifle has standard twist rifling or cut down progressive twist rifling is to do a sulphur cast of the inside of the barrel at the muzzle.
Think they would lend us C2766 for the weekend?
Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head.
Warren Commission testimony of Secret Service Agent Clinton J. Hill, 1964
19-04-2014, 01:46 AM (This post was last modified: 19-04-2014, 02:12 AM by Drew Phipps.)
Bob Prudhomme Wrote:The only way to tell if this rifle has standard twist rifling or cut down progressive twist rifling is to do a sulphur cast of the inside of the barrel at the muzzle.
Think they would lend us C2766 for the weekend?
I think that Frazier did a sulphur cast. Let me see if I can find an image of that.
Yep. CE 540.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]5910[/ATTACH]
The cast starts at the throat, right? I'm no expert, but I'm guessing thats not a progressive twist.
IIRC Frazier testified that the rifle was 7.35 rebored for 6.5mm. Does that help us in any way, assuming he's telling the truth?
Bob Prudhomme Wrote:The only way to tell if this rifle has standard twist rifling or cut down progressive twist rifling is to do a sulphur cast of the inside of the barrel at the muzzle.
Think they would lend us C2766 for the weekend?
I think that Frazier did a sulphur cast. Let me see if I can find an image of that.
Yep. CE 540.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]5910[/ATTACH]
The cast starts at the throat, right? I'm no expert, but I'm guessing thats not a progressive twist.
IIRC Frazier testified that the rifle was 7.35 rebored for 6.5mm. Does that help us in any way, assuming he's telling the truth?
A sulphur cast can be done from either the throat or the muzzle of the rifle, for various reasons. They are often done at the throat to get a reverse model of the cartridge chamber.
CE 540 is a rather odd sulphur cast, as I seem to recall Frazier testifying that a cast was made of the bullet chamber, as well. What makes you think that is not a cast of progressive twist rifling?
It is a popular myth that 7.35mm short rifles were re-bored or re-barreled to 6.5mm. The majority of 7.35mm short rifles were sold to Finland and used in their war against the USSR. Think of it for a second. How can you rebore a rifle from a larger calibre to a smaller one? There are cases from the First World War where old 10.35mm M1870/87 Vetterli Vitali rifles from the 19th Century were converted to 6.5mm by having a liner tube welded to the inside of the barrel, but this was never the case with the M91/38 short rifle.
As I've said before, Frazier was not a source for accurate information.
Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head.
Warren Commission testimony of Secret Service Agent Clinton J. Hill, 1964
It appears at least to me that the visible rifling at the upper left corner of the cast looks like it starts out pretty much at the same angle that appears on our bullets. If it was a gain twist barrel wouldn't the spin at the throat be much shallower?
Found some more weirdness. In the NARA photo of CE 569, the scale is 14 pixels to the mm. Since the bullet jacket is positioned at 45 degrees angle, I had to add some Pythagoras to do the land measurement. 14 (diagonal) pixels wide x SQR(2) = 17.8 pixels/14 = 1.41 mm or .056 inches. This is smaller than Bob's specs for the WCC bullet (.085) and also smaller than Frazier's WC testimony (.07). In addition, the diameter of this jacket appears to be close to 7.5 mm which is much larger, but I suppose it could be flattened There isn't an end on view.
Somehow, though, the portion of this FMJ is matched to Oswald's rifle "to the exclusion of all other weapons."
Drew Phipps Wrote:It appears at least to me that the visible rifling at the upper left corner of the cast looks like it starts out pretty much at the same angle that appears on our bullets. If it was a gain twist barrel wouldn't the spin at the throat be much shallower?
Found some more weirdness. In the NARA photo of CE 569, the scale is 14 pixels to the mm. Since the bullet jacket is positioned at 45 degrees angle, I had to add some Pythagoras to do the land measurement. 14 (diagonal) pixels wide x SQR(2) = 17.8 pixels/14 = 1.41 mm or .056 inches. This is smaller than Bob's specs for the WCC bullet (.085) and also smaller than Frazier's WC testimony (.07). In addition, the diameter of this jacket appears to be close to 7.5 mm which is much larger, but I suppose it could be flattened There isn't an end on view.
Somehow, though, the portion of this FMJ is matched to Oswald's rifle "to the exclusion of all other weapons."
Unfortunately, the only evidence we have of the sulphur cast designated CE 540 is Frazier's testimony and one very grainy photo in which I am having difficulty even seeing a land impression. This sulphur cast could be from C2766, another Carcano short rifle or even a rifle of a totally different calibre. For that matter, it could be a cast made of the inside of a water pipe. It proves absolutely nothing.
If it were not for the machined down outer chamber first introduced in the M38 7.35mm short rifle (I discussed this in length two posts back) and continued in all Carcano rifles from 1940 until Carcano production halted at the end of the War, there would be no reason to be suspect of the M91/38 short rifle's riflings. However, as I pointed out, while many M91/38's were made with standard twist rifling, the option of cutting down a long rifle barrel with progressive twist rifling and hiding this fact by machining off the flat facets with all of the stampings on them still existed.
Just as the only way of differentiating between an M38 and an M91/38, outside of the fixed rear sights and the calibre stamps, is to examine the inside of the barrel, the same is true of differentiating between M91/38's with standard twist rifling and cut down progressive twist rifling.
For my money, I would not be happy until I was allowed to examine C2766.
Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head.
Warren Commission testimony of Secret Service Agent Clinton J. Hill, 1964
Is the fact that Oswald's gun stock was stained black pertinent to the discussion of the barrel type? I saw an article that stated that the black stained stock was in fact part a batch of weapons that were specifically made for Mussolini's personal guard (to match their uniforms). Wouldn't our fashion conscious fascist want the most accurate barrel of the two (which I'm guessing isn't the sawed-off 91)?
That begs another question, if the black stock thing is true. Wouldn't a gun distributor in 1963 know that the black-stocked 91/38 was far more rare that the regular kind, and charge more? You might guess that Oswald stained the stock himself, but the 91/38 test rifle that the FBI got from the same company "Oswald" allegedly ordered it from was black, too. Is the black stock story just a load of bull? Most of the Carcano images you see on the web are not stained black.
PS: even though the sulphur cast photo is grainy, I can see some sort of land/groove impression. IF we assume that Frazier properly made the cast from CE 139, and IF we assume that cast is CE 540, and IF we assume that CE 139 is a random standard surplus 91/38 (and not some custom built job that just looks like one), then the following is true. The angle of the impression (on the cast) looks the same as the lands and grooves on the bullet, which implies a standard twist from the get-go. A beginning gain twist rate of 1 / 15.3 for a .268 caliber bullet is an angle of 88.9 degrees from the diameter, and the impression certainly varies more than 1.1 degrees from the direction of the bullet.
Drew Phipps Wrote:Is the fact that Oswald's gun stock was stained black pertinent to the discussion of the barrel type? I saw an article that stated that the black stained stock was in fact part a batch of weapons that were specifically made for Mussolini's personal guard (to match their uniforms). Wouldn't our fashion conscious fascist want the most accurate barrel of the two (which I'm guessing isn't the sawed-off 91)?
That begs another question, if the black stock thing is true. Wouldn't a gun distributor in 1963 know that the black-stocked 91/38 was far more rare that the regular kind, and charge more? You might guess that Oswald stained the stock himself, but the 91/38 test rifle that the FBI got from the same company "Oswald" allegedly ordered it from was black, too. Is the black stock story just a load of bull? Most of the Carcano images you see on the web are not stained black.
PS: even though the sulphur cast photo is grainy, I can see some sort of land/groove impression. IF we assume that Frazier properly made the cast from CE 139, and IF we assume that cast is CE 540, and IF we assume that CE 139 is a random standard surplus 91/38 (and not some custom built job that just looks like one), then the following is true. The angle of the impression (on the cast) looks the same as the lands and grooves on the bullet, which implies a standard twist from the get-go. A beginning gain twist rate of 1 / 15.3 for a .268 caliber bullet is an angle of 88.9 degrees from the diameter, and the impression certainly varies more than 1.1 degrees from the direction of the bullet.
I'm afraid that is one too many IF's for my liking. Considering how much other incorrect evidence that was supplied by Frazier, and how many outright lies told by the FBI, I will continue to entertain the possibility that the sulphur cast known as CE 540 had nothing to do with C2766, and that it is entirely possible that C2766 was one of a number of M91/38 short rifles made from an M91 long rifle with progressive twist rifling.
C2766 was definitely not one of the black stocked short rifles issued to Mussolini's personal guard, although the stock of C2766 was dark in colour. This website deals well with Carcano models and variants, and I have quoted from there.
"There are other Carcano variants, but these tend to be extremely rare or conversions of other types. For example, there are the Guardie del Re (King's Guard) and Moschettieri del Duce (Mussolini's Guard) variants, both of which are rare, and are distinguished by the coloring (gilded ornamentation and black stock, respectively), and non-standard stock/bayonet treatments."
As C2766 is clearly a standard M91/38, and there is no gilding on it, this proves, beyond a doubt, it is the garden variety of short rifle.
Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head.
Warren Commission testimony of Secret Service Agent Clinton J. Hill, 1964
