Mr. SIMMONS. Yes. We fired this weapon from a machine rest for
round-to-round dispersion. We fired exactly 20 rounds in this test, and
the dispersion which we measured is of conventional magnitude, about
the same that we get with our present military rifles, and the standard
deviation of dispersion is .29 mil.
Mr. EISENBERG. That is a fraction of a degree?
Mr. SIMMONS. A mil is an angular measurement. There are 17.7 mils to a
degree.
Mr. EISENBERG. Do I understand your testimony to be that this rifle is
as accurate as the current American military rifles?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes. As far as we can determine from bench-rest firing.
Mr. EISENBERG. Would you consider that to be a high degree of accuracy?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes, the weapon is quite accurate. For most small arms,
we discover that the round-to-round dispersion is of the order of
three-tenths of a mil. We have run into some unusual ones, however,
which give us higher values, but very few which give us smaller values,
except in selected lots of ammunition.
Mr. McCLOY. You are talking about the present military rifle--will you
designate it?
Mr. SIMMONS. The M-14.
Mr. McCLOY. Is it as accurate as the Springfield 1906 ammunition?
Mr. SIMMONS. I am not familiar with the difference between the M-14 in
its accuracy and the 1906 Springfield. These are very similar in their
dispersion.
Mr. McCLOY. At a hundred yards, what does that amount to? What is the
dispersion?
Mr. SIMMONS. Well, at a hundred yards, one mil is 3.6 inches, and 0.3
of that is a little more than an inch.
Mr. EISENBERG. You tested this with what type of ammunition, Mr.
Simmons?
Mr. SIMMONS. The ammunition was labeled Type Ball, and it was made by
the Western Cartridge Co., Division of Olin Industries.
Mr. EISENBERG. Was that a 6.5 mm.?
Mr. SIMMONS. 6.5-mm. Mannlicher-Carcano.
Mr. EISENBERG. In the course of this test from a machine rest, Mr.
Simmons, did you also attempt to determine the muzzle velocity?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes; we also measured muzzle velocities for approximately
10 rounds of the ammunition. We gather from these measurements that the
nominal velocity, the nominal muzzle velocity is of the order of 2,200
feet per second, and the velocity at about 200 feet from the muzzle
is approximately 2,000 feet per second. And there is some variation
in velocity from round to round as there is with all small-arms
ammunition. But the variation is relatively small, and within the same
order of magnitude as for conventional ammunition.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you test the bullets for yaw?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes; we measured yaw also, and all measurements of yaw
were also small. We had no values in excess of 2 degrees, and many
values were less than 1 degree in yaw, indicating that the round is
quite stable.
Mr. EISENBERG. How did you test for yaw?
Mr. SIMMONS. We took spark shadowgraph pictures at various stations
down range from the muzzle, so that we actually have pictures of the
position of the bullet relative to the top and bottom of our range.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you bring those pictures with you?
Mr. SIMMONS. No; I do not have them with me.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you furnish those to the Commission at a later
date?
Mr. SIMMONS. They could be made available later. I would like to point
out these are not pictures, however. They are on large pieces of glass,
and they are not photos.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can they be read by a layman?
Mr. SIMMONS. That I do not know. I do not read them.
Mr. EISENBERG. Well, I wonder whether you can send them up, and we
could take a look at them.
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes; we can have them forwarded.
Mr. EISENBERG. Was it reported to you by the persons who ran the
machine-rest tests whether they had any difficulties with sighting the
weapon in?
Mr. SIMMONS. Well, they could not sight the weapon in using the
telescope, and no attempt was made to sight it in using the iron
sight. We did adjust the telescopic sight by the addition of two
shims, one which tended to adjust the azimuth, and one which adjusted
an elevation. The azimuth correction could have been made without the
addition of the shim, but it would have meant that we would have used
all of the adjustment possible, and the shim was a more convenient
means--not more convenient, but a more permanent means of correction.
Mr. EISENBERG. By azimuth, do you refer to the crosshair which is
sometimes referred to as the windage crosshair?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Would you recognize these shims that I display to you,
Mr. Simmons, as being the shims that were placed in the weapon?
Mr. SIMMONS. I saw the shims only when they were in the weapon, but
those look very much like what was evident from the external view,
after they were in place.
Mr. EISENBERG. For the record, Mr. Chairman, these shims were given to
me by the FBI who told me that they had removed them from the weapon
after they had been placed there by Mr. Simmons' laboratory.
May I have these introduced as evidence?
Mr. McCLOY. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Simmons, I find there are three shims here. You
mentioned two. Would three be consistent with what you were told?
Mr. SIMMONS. I was told two. These were put in by a gunsmith in one of
our machine shops--rather a machinist in one of our machine shops.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Simmons, I wonder whether you could take these shims
back after I have marked them to find out whether the three had been
placed?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. I am marking these 576, 577, and 578. They consist of
three shims in three small envelopes.
(The items referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 576, 577,
and 578, and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Simmons, did you have a test run to determine the
possibility of scoring hits with this weapon, Exhibit 139, on a given
target at a given distance under rapid-fire conditions?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes; we did. We placed three targets, which were head
and shoulder silhouettes, at distances of 175 feet, 240 feet, and 265
feet, and these distances are slant ranges from the window ledge of a
tower which is about 30 feet high. We used three firers in an attempt
to obtain hits on all three targets within as short a time interval as
possible.
I should make one comment here relative to the angular displacement
of the targets. We did not reproduce these angles exactly from the
map which we had been given because the conditions in the field were
a little awkward for this. But the distance--the angular distance
from the first target to the second was greater than from the second
to the third, which would tend to correspond to a longer interval of
time between the first and second impact than between the second and
the third. The movement of the rifle was greater from the first to the
second target than from the second to the third.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Simmons, were your marksmen instructed to aim at the
three targets in consecutive order?
Mr. SIMMONS. The marksmen were instructed to take as much time as they
desired at the first target, and then to fire--at the first target,
being at 175 feet--to then fire at the target emplaced at 240 feet, and
then at the one at 265 feet.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you state where you derived these distances?
Mr. SIMMONS. These distances were the values given on the survey map
which were given to us.
Mr. EISENBERG. Are you sure they were not the values I gave to you
myself?
Mr. SIMMONS. I stand corrected. These are values--we were informed that
the numbers on the survey map were possibly in error. The distances are
very close, however.
Mr. EISENBERG. For the record, the figures which I gave Mr. Simmons are
approximations and are not to be taken as the Commission's conclusive
determination of what those distances are.
Mr. SIMMONS. For our experiment, I do not see how a difference of a few
feet would make any difference.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Simmons, did you take pictures or have pictures
taken showing what that range looked like?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes; I have copies of these pictures here. I show you
three pictures--the first showing the window from which the weapon was
fired in our experiments; the second showing the view of the three
targets from the window; and the third showing a rifleman in position.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Simmons, did you take these pictures yourself?
Mr. SIMMONS. No; these pictures were taken by one of the cameramen from
the development and proof services.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you see the scenes represented in these pictures?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Are these pictures accurate reproductions of these
scenes?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, I would like to have the first, second,
and third pictures described by Mr. Simmons admitted as exhibits. That
will be 579 for the first, 580 for the second, and 581 for the third.
Mr. McCLOY. They may be admitted.
(The photographs referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 579,
580, and 581 and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Simmons, the targets were--well, can you describe
the targets for us?
Mr. SIMMONS. The targets are standard head-and-shoulders silhouettes,
and they consist of approximately 2 square feet in area.
Mr. EISENBERG. How many marksmen were involved?
Mr. SIMMONS. We used three riflemen.
Mr. EISENBERG. And can you tell us what their background was?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes. All three riflemen are rated as Master by the
National Rifle Association. Two of them are civilian gunners in the
Small Arms Division of our Development and Proof Services, and the
third is presently in the Army, and he has considerable background as a
rifleman, and also has a Master rating.
Mr. EISENBERG. Each fired one or more series of three rounds?
Mr. SIMMONS. Each fired two series of three rounds, using the
telescopic sight. Then one of the firers repeated the exercise using
the iron sight--because we had no indication whether the telescope had
been used.
Mr. EISENBERG. So the total number of rounds fired was what?
Mr. SIMMONS. 21.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you bring with you targets or copies of the targets?
Mr. SIMMONS. I brought photos of the targets.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did you take these photographs, Mr. Simmons, or have
them taken under your supervision?
Mr. SIMMONS. These photographs were taken by the photographic
laboratory in our Ballistic Measurements Laboratory, which is one of
the complex of laboratories within the Ballistic Research Laboratory.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you verify these photographs as being accurate
reproductions of the targets?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have these admitted as 582, 583 and
584?
Mr. McCLOY. They may be admitted.
(The photographs referred to were marked Commission Exhibits Nos. 582,
583, and 584 for identification and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Simmons, could you discuss the results of the tests
you ran, by using these photographs?
Mr. SIMMONS. Exhibit 582 is the target which was emplaced at 175 feet.
All firers hit the first target, and this was to be expected, because
they had as much time as they desired to aim at the first target.
As you can see from the picture, the accuracy of the weapon is quite
good.
Mr. McCLOY. That first target is what distance?
Mr. SIMMONS. 175 feet. And we had to make an assumption here about the
point of aim. It is quite likely that in fact each man was aiming at a
different portion of the target--there were no markings on the target
visible to the firer.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did I understand you just told the firers to aim at the
target without referring to----
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. There is an apparent crossline running darkly through
that photograph.
Mr. SIMMONS. These lines were drawn in afterwards, in order for us to
make some measurements from the actual impact point.
The target which was emplaced at 240 feet, as shown in Exhibit 583--we
had rather an unusual coincidence with respect to this target. This
involved the displacement of the weapon to a sufficient angle that the
basic firing position of the man had to be changed. And because they
knew time was very important, they made the movement very quickly. And
for the first four attempts, the firers missed the second target. Of
course, we made a rather, I guess, disadvantageous error in the test by
pointing out that they had missed on the second target, and there was a
conscious effort made on the additional rounds to hit the second target.
On the third target, the angle through which the weapon had to be moved
to get to the third target from the second was relatively small, and
there were only two rounds which did not hit the target at 270 feet.
One of these rounds, by the way, was used in the sequence where the
iron sight was employed.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Simmons, when you said that the firers had to make a
large shift relatively in their firing position, and were in a hurry,
is this your interpretation or is this based on discussions with them
subsequently?
Mr. SIMMONS. This is based on discussions with the firers after the
experiment.
Mr. EISENBERG. After these tests were finished, did you make a
determination of the amount of error--average amount of error in the
aim of these riflemen?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes. By assuming that all riflemen had aimed at the
intersection of the lines that we have drawn on these pictures, we
calculated the total aiming--the aiming error associated with the three
riflemen--this is one number to describe the accuracy of all three
riflemen. And against the first target the accuracy observed was about
.7 mils, in standard deviation. Against the second target, the accuracy
was 1.4 mils. And against the third target, it was 1.2 mils.
Mr. EISENBERG. Again, could you convert those at a hundred yards to
inches?
Mr. SIMMONS. 0.7 of a mil at 100 yards is approximately 2 inches. 1.4
mils is approximately 4 inches. And 1.2 mils is approximately 3-1/2
inches.
Mr. EISENBERG. In arriving at these figures, had you discounted the
round-to-round dispersion as determined in the bench rest test?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes. We have subtracted out the round-to-round dispersion.
Mr. EISENBERG. But the actual accuracy of the riflemen would have to
include the round-to-round dispersion, would it not?
Mrs. SIMMONS. Yes; it would.
Mr. EISENBERG. Why did you then subtract the round-to-round dispersion
figure, or discount it?
Mr. SIMMONS. We wanted to determine what the aiming error itself was
associated with the rifle.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you give us the times in which the various riflemen
used to fire the three shots in each sequence?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes. And the numbers which I will give you will be the
average of two readings on stop watches.
Mr. EISENBERG. For each rifleman?
Mr. SIMMONS. For each exercise.
Mr. Hendrix fired twice. The time for the first exercise was 8.25
seconds; the time for the second exercise was 7.0 seconds.
Mr. Staley, on the first exercise, fired in 6-3/4 seconds; the second
attempt he used 6.45 seconds.
Specialist Miller used 4.6 seconds on his first attempt, 5.15 seconds
in his second attempt, and 4.45 seconds in his exercise using the iron
sight.
Mr. EISENBERG. What was the accuracy of Specialist Miller?
Mr. SIMMONS. I do not have his accuracy separated from the group.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is it possible to separate the accuracy out?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes; it is, by an additional calculation.
Mr. Miller succeeded in hitting the third target on both attempts with
the telescope. He missed the second target on both attempts with the
telescope, but he hit the second target with the iron sight. And he
emplaced all three rounds on the target, the first target.
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.
Mr. EISENBERG. What position did the rifleman fire from, Mr. Simmons?
Mr. SIMMONS. The firers braced an elbow on the window sill and used
pretty much a standard sitting position, using a stool.
Mr. EISENBERG. How much practice had they had with the weapon, Exhibit
139, before they began firing?
Mr. SIMMONS. They had each attempted the exercise without the use of
ammunition, and had worked the bolt as they tried the exercise. They
had not pulled the trigger during the exercise, however, because we
were a little concerned about breaking the firing pin.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you give us an estimate of how much time they used
in this dry-run practice, each?
Mr. SIMMONS. They used no more than 2 or 3 minutes each.
Mr. EISENBERG. Did they make any comments concerning the weapon?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes; there were several comments made--particularly with
respect to the amount of effort required to open the bolt. As a matter
of fact, Mr. Staley had difficulty in opening the bolt in his first
firing exercise. He thought it was completely up and it was not, and
he had to retrace his steps as he attempted to open the bolt after the
first round.
There was also comment made about the trigger pull, which is different
as far as these firers are concerned. It is in effect a two-stage
operation where the first--in the first stage the trigger is relatively
free, and it suddenly required a greater pull to actually fire the
weapon.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Simmons, did you prepare a table showing the
probability of hit at a given target at given ranges by riflemen with
given degrees of accuracy?
Mr. SIMMONS. Well, we prepared a table which showed what the
probability of a hit would be on specific sizes of target as a function
of aiming error, and using the appropriate round-to-round dispersion
also in these calculations.
Mr. EISENBERG. What were the targets that you used in your calculations?
Mr. SIMMONS. We used two circular targets, one of 4 inches in radius
and one of 9 inches in radius, to approximate the area of the head and
the area of the shoulders, or the thorax, actually. And a significant
point to these calculations to us is that against the larger target, if
you fire with the 0.7 mil aiming error which was observed against the
first target, the probability of hitting that target is 1, and it is 1
at all three ranges, out to 270 feet.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you explain the meaning of the probability being 1?
Mr. SIMMONS. Well, the probability is effectively one. Actually the
number is 0.99 and several more digits afterwards. It is rounded off to
1. Simply implying that the probability of a hit is very high with the
small aiming errors and short range.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now of course this aiming error is derived from the
three riflemen who you employed in the tests, is that correct?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you proceed to the other two?
Mr. SIMMONS. Using the 1.2 mil aiming error, again at the larger
targets, the probability of hitting the target at 175 feet is 1; at 240
feet it is 0.96; and at 270 feet it is 0.92.
Mr. EISENBERG. How would you characterize the second two figures in
terms of probability?
Mr. SIMMONS. These also are very high values.
Mr. EISENBERG. The mil figure was 1.2, was it?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Does that include, did you say, both aiming error and
round-to-round dispersion?
Mr. SIMMONS. The 1.2 is the aiming error. When we include the
round-to-round dispersion, it becomes only 1.24 mils.
Mr. EISENBERG. Does the probability reflect the 1.2 or the 1.24 figure?
Mr. SIMMONS. It reflects the total error, which is 1.24.
Mr. EISENBERG. And the same on the first series of calculations you
gave us?
Mr. SIMMONS. Yes.
Mr. EISENBERG. Would you go on to the third?
Mr. SIMMONS. Using the 1.4 mil aiming error, and the round-to-round
dispersion, giving a total error of 1.43 mils, the probability of hit
at the 175 foot target is 0.99; at 240 feet it is 0.91; at 270 feet it
is 0.85.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you give us the figures for the smaller target?
Mr. SIMMONS. Using the 0.7 mil aiming error, the probability of a hit at
175 feet is 0.96; at 240 feet, 0.81; at 270 feet, 0.73.
For the 1.2 mil aiming error, the probability is 0.69 at 175 feet; 0.74
at 240 feet; 0.39 at 270 feet.