Who shot the former US president?

[jeremyp]

The bullet is travelling slower than the speed of sound, as it's from a suppressed rifle (no crack). The clip is slowed down to 1/10 speed, so that's 6 frames per second visible, and the bullet is visible in two frames.

It doesn't matter what speed you view it at. It's the speed at which the video is taken that matters. If you want the bullet to appear on several frames, you need to speed up the frame rate. 

Edit: I just checked your youtube video. It's only filmed at 30 frames per second. Also, the object, which is quite large, appears in three frames. That's one tenth of a second, in which time, even a slow bullet would travel about 30 metres. This object is much slower than that (at least if it's a bullet and therefore quite close).

[Spud]

It doesn't matter what speed you view it at. It's the speed at which the video is taken that matters. If you want the bullet to appear on several frames, you need to speed up the frame rate. 

Edit: I just checked your youtube video. It's only filmed at 30 frames per second. Also, the object, which is quite large, appears in three frames. That's one tenth of a second, in which time, even a slow bullet would travel about 30 metres. This object is much slower than that (at least if it's a bullet and therefore quite close).

Thanks, how did you check the frame rate? If the object goes across the screen in one tenth of a second, and the distance it travels is 30m (a guess), it would be going about 300m/s, so not much slower than sound which agrees with the suppressed sound it makes.
But even if the distance was 15m the speed would still be faster than the slowest (according to Google) bullet , so I can't think what else it could be. Anyway, if suppressed shots were being fired before the loud volley we all hear, that must merit investigation?

[jeremyp]

Thanks, how did you check the frame rate?

If you access Youtube from a browser, it has the ability to go forwards or backwards one frame at a time. The relevant controls are the "," key and the "." key. I stopped the video at 4:16 and then hit "," until the time stamp changed to 4:15. Then I hit "." continuously (counting as I went long) until the time stamp was 4:17.

If the object goes across the screen in one tenth of a second, and the distance it travels is 30m (a guess), it would be going about 300m/s, so not much slower than sound which agrees with the suppressed sound it makes.
But even if the distance was 15m the speed would still be faster than the slowest (according to Google) bullet

It wouldn't be the slowest bullet. The slowest bullet e.g. a pistol round would not be accurate at the distances involved.

so I can't think what else it could be

Really? You can't think of an insect?

[SteveH]

It wouldn't be the slowest bullet. The slowest bullet e.g. a pistol round would not be accurate at the distances involved.

Well, it wasn't accurate, was it? It missed!

[jeremyp]

Well, it wasn't accurate, was it? It missed!

By millimetres

For Spud's benefit, I've created a composite frame consisting of the second and third frames in which the object appears. You can use a measuring tool to measure the rough size of the object and the distance it travels between frames. Both versions of the object are about the same size which means it is not traveling towards or away from the camera. The distance between the two versions of the object is about 25 times the length of the object.

If this is a bullet, it is probably something like a maximum of 20 mm long. So that means, between the two frames, it has travelled 500mm or 0.5metres. There are 30 frames in a second, meaning the object would be travelling at 15 metres per second. That's far too slow to be a bullet.

It is not a bullet.

[Spud]

By millimetres

We don't know what the intended target was; it was heading in the direction of Crooks.

For Spud's benefit, I've created a composite frame consisting of the second and third frames in which the object appears. You can use a measuring tool to measure the rough size of the object and the distance it travels between frames. Both versions of the object are about the same size which means it is not traveling towards or away from the camera. The distance between the two versions of the object is about 25 times the length of the object.

If this is a bullet, it is probably something like a maximum of 20 mm long. So that means, between the two frames, it has travelled 500mm or 0.5metres. There are 30 frames in a second, meaning the object would be travelling at 15 metres per second. That's far too slow to be a bullet.

It is not a bullet.

Thanks Jeremy, good of you to go to the trouble to do that. I find it difficult to believe that the distance between the two positions is as small as 0.5m, but who knows.

[Maeght]

We don't know what the intended target was; it was heading in the direction of Crooks. I appreciate your efforts, but there is no way it's as slow as 10mps. It could be longer in length and we don't know how far from the camera it is, and thus the distance travelled between the two frames. Based on being just about able to see it at normal speed (having first detected it at 0.25x), I'd estimate 100mps, twice the speed of a fast tennis serve (50mps).

How are you ruling out that it is an insect?

[Spud]

How are you ruling out that it is an insect?

Google says dragonflies are the fastest, at 15.6mps (35mph), and you can track a dragonfly when it passes by, unlike this object. Also, they have wings. And this is accompanied by a sound identified by sniper instructor Clay Martin as suppressed gunfire.

[Maeght]

Google says dragonflies are the fastest, at 15.6mps (35mph), and you can track a dragonfly when it passes by, unlike this object. Also, they have wings. And this is accompanied by a sound identified by sniper instructor Clay Martin as suppressed gunfire.

The right hand one looks like it has wings to me. What do you mean by you can track a dragonfly? You don't know that the sound is associated with the object.

[Spud]

The right hand one looks like it has wings to me. What do you mean by you can track a dragonfly? You don't know that the sound is associated with the object.

I see some fuzz on the upper side in one frame, but the other two frames show no sign of wings. The sound is a frame or so behind when the object becomes visible, which is consistent with sound waves taking longer to reach the viewer.

[jeremyp]

We don't know what the intended target was; it was heading in the direction of Crooks.

SteveH was talking about the one that grazed Tr*mp's ear.

Thanks Jeremy, good of you to go to the trouble to do that. I find it difficult to believe that the distance between the two positions is as small as 0.5m, but who knows.

If you want the distance to be bigger, the objects have to be much larger than rifle bullets.

[jeremyp]

Google says dragonflies are the fastest, at 15.6mps (35mph), and you can track a dragonfly when it passes by, unlike this object.

If the object was dragonfly sized, then its speed is consistent with a fast flying dragonfly. The rough calculation I did above came up with 15 m/s.

Also, they have wings. And this is accompanied by a sound identified by sniper instructor Clay Martin as suppressed gunfire.

What noise does suppressed gunfire make and how does it differ from the noise a dragonfly makes.

The photographic evidence is incontrovertible. If the object is a bullet, it can only have been travelling at around 15 m/s. So it can't be a bullet.

[Maeght]

I see some fuzz on the upper side in one frame, but the other two frames show no sign of wings. The sound is a frame or so behind when the object becomes visible, which is consistent with sound waves taking longer to reach the viewer.

Could be an unrelated noise. Could be a noise related to an insect.

[Spud]

If the object was dragonfly sized, then its speed is consistent with a fast flying dragonfly. The rough calculation I did above came up with 15 m/s.

Yes, and I am impressed that you figured out how to calculate that - it wouldn't have occurred to me.

[Spud]

There is footage of three other "bullets". One makes a hole in Trump's jacket as he raises his right arm. Another is seen flying past him and the bodyguards as they are leaving the podium. One more flies past the large American flag that had earlier managed to turn into the shape of an angel.

I'd also like your opinions on the first window to the right of the four chimneys on the side of the American Glass building, in the Dayve Steward video. Just before the loud shooting it has something like a red curtain across it, which then disappears after the shots. We subsequently see a white cord across the window, which also disappears. Then we see two flashes coming from it, within about a second (at 5:04). If you get time.

[Maeght]

There is footage of three other "bullets". One makes a hole in Trump's jacket as he raises his right arm. Another is seen flying past him and the bodyguards as they are leaving the podium. One more flies past the large American flag that had earlier managed to turn into the shape of an angel.

I'd also like your opinions on the first window to the right of the four chimneys on the side of the American Glass building, in the Dayve Steward video. Just before the loud shooting it has something like a red curtain across it, which then disappears after the shots. We subsequently see a white cord across the window, which also disappears. Then we see two flashes coming from it, within about a second (at 5:04). If you get time.

The hole in Trump's jacket is a fold in the jacket of the SS agent.

https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-trump-shooting-bullet-hole-chest-photo-239400193944

[Spud]

The hole in Trump's jacket is a fold in the jacket of the SS agent.

https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-trump-shooting-bullet-hole-chest-photo-239400193944

Perhaps. Found what I was looking for:
https://x.com/TheodorouJ53690/status/1818885871950610615
(Projectile is in several frames, the two shown are before and after possibly passing through his jacket.)

[jeremyp]

Perhaps. Found what I was looking for:
https://x.com/TheodorouJ53690/status/1818885871950610615
(Projectile is in several frames, the two shown are before and after possibly passing through his jacket.)

Have you learned nothing from the previous few posts?

If a bullet hit Tr*mp's jacket, a video with him filling the frame like that would show the bullet at most in one frame.

Anyway, Tr*mp's jacket was not hit by a bullet, so the point is moot.

[Spud]

Have you learned nothing from the previous few posts?

If a bullet hit Tr*mp's jacket, a video with him filling the frame like that would show the bullet at most in one frame.

Anyway, Tr*mp's jacket was not hit by a bullet, so the point is moot.

But there are more videos being made public in which bullets, if that's what they are, are being spotted. They all show up in about three frames.

Here's an explanation why this is possible, notwithstanding your analysis:
https://x.com/I_Am_JohnCullen/status/1821212559300497527/photo/1
If the smartphone camera shoots 8,000 frames per second and selects 30 frames that best represent what's happening (if I've understood the post in the link correctly), this could mean that the frames containing the bullets are selected from the particular slice of the 8,000 in which the bullet passes through, (eg, frames 2000-2500) then positioned uniformly across the 30, making it look as if they are travelling slowly.
They look like bullets, not bugs, and coincide with the sound of suppressed gunfire. This suggests that they are bullets.

[jeremyp]

But there are more videos being made public in which bullets, if that's what they are, are being spotted. They all show up in about three frames.

Here's an explanation why this is possible, notwithstanding your analysis:
https://x.com/I_Am_JohnCullen/status/1821212559300497527/photo/1
If the smartphone camera shoots 8,000 frames per second

Seriously? You think a smartphone shoots 8,000 frames per second? Not a chance.

[Maeght]

Perhaps. Found what I was looking for:
https://x.com/TheodorouJ53690/status/1818885871950610615
(Projectile is in several frames, the two shown are before and after possibly passing through his jacket.)

You said the bullet made a hole. Can't see one. What happened in the next frame or two - why does it stop there?

[Spud]

You said the bullet made a hole. Can't see one. What happened in the next frame or two - why does it stop there?

When I first saw the video and the photo I thought the bullet had made the hole. The bullet is significant with or without a hole, though.
Here's a more complete video which shows two more frames:
https://x.com/I_Am_JohnCullen/status/1819030026203066826/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1819030026203066826&currentTweet=1819030026203066826&currentTweet=1819030026203066826&currentTweetUser=I_Am_JohnCullen&currentTweetUser=I_Am_JohnCullen&currentTweetUser=I_Am_JohnCullen&mode=profile
If it was a bullet, though, it would surely have hit someone behind him.

[Maeght]

When I first saw the video and the photo I thought the bullet had made the hole. The bullet is significant with or without a hole, though.
Here's a more complete video which shows two more frames:
https://x.com/I_Am_JohnCullen/status/1819030026203066826/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1819030026203066826&currentTweet=1819030026203066826&currentTweet=1819030026203066826&currentTweetUser=I_Am_JohnCullen&currentTweetUser=I_Am_JohnCullen&currentTweetUser=I_Am_JohnCullen&mode=profile
If it was a bullet, though, it would surely have hit someone behind him.

Link doesn't work.

There is no hole. Don't know it was a bullet.

[Spud]

Link doesn't work.

There is no hole. Don't know it was a bullet.

An earlier frame shows it pass the podium (2nd screenshot). It would have gone too high to hit people in the stands (1st screenshot).

[Spud]

Seriously? You think a smartphone shoots 8,000 frames per second? Not a chance.

I can't get my head around whether there's a difference between frame rate when recording and when playing it back. But I think there's a problem with your method of working out the speed by guessing the size of the object. It's pretty obviously a bullet, yet 15 m/s is slow enough to follow something with the eyes and this is impossible with the object. Perhaps this problem relates to downsampling, perhaps not.