how each of these "w"? im guessing it means work. and three weapons from then that are "new"? are:
Rifles. All nations used more than one type of firearm during the First World War. The rifles most commonly used by the major combatants were, among the Allies, the Lee-Enfield .303 (Britain and Commonwealth), Lebel and Berthier 8mm (France), Mannlicher–Carcano M1891, 6.5mm (Italy), Mosin–Nagant M1891 7.62 (Russia), and Springfield 1903 .30–06 (USA). The Central Powers employed Steyr–Mannlicher M95 (Austria-Hungary and Bulgaria), Mauser M98G 7.92mm (Germany), and Mauser M1877 7.65mm (Turkey). The American Springfield used a bolt-action design that so closely copied Mauser’s M1989 that the US Government had to pay a licensing fee to Mauser, a practice that continued until America entered the war.
Machine guns. Most machine guns of World War 1 were based on Hiram Maxim’s 1884 design. They had a sustained fire of 450–600 rounds per minute, allowing defenders to cut down attacking waves of enemy troops like a scythe cutting wheat. There was some speculation that the machine gun would completely replace the rifle. Contrary to popular belief, machine guns were not the most lethal weapon of the Great War. That dubious distinction goes to the artillery.
Flamethrowers. Reports of infantry using some sort of flame-throwing device can be found as far back as ancient China. During America’s Civil War some Southern newspapers claimed Abraham Lincoln had observed a test of such a weapon. But the first recorded use of hand-held flamethrowers in combat was on February 26, 1915, when the Germans deployed the weapon at Malancourt, near Verdun. Tanks carried on a man’s back used nitrogen pressure to spray fuel oil, which was ignited as it left the muzzle of a small, hand-directed pipe. Over the course of the war, Germany utilized 3,000 Flammenwerfer troops; over 650 flamethrower attacks were made. The British and French both developed flame-throwing weapons but did not make such extensive use of them.
there are many more, but here are 3 i found from a trustworthy source!
Answer: $425,000
Explanation: The total overhead cost can be computed suing following formula :-
total overhead cost = fixed overhead cost + variable overhead cost
where,
fixed overhead cost = $90,000
=$335,000
so,putting the values into equation we get :-
total overhead cost = $90,000 + $335,000
= $425,000
Jan. 1, 2013:
Initial investment = (100 shares)*($30/share) = $3,000.
End of 2013:
Dividend collected = ($2/share)*(100 shares) = $200
End of 2014:
Dividend collected = ($3/share)*(100 shares) = $300
End of 2015:
Dividend collected = ($4/share)*(100 shares) = $400
Returns::
From sales of 100 shares = ($33/share)*(100 shares) = $3,300
From dividends = 200 + 300 + 400 = $900
Total returns = 3,300 + 900 = $4,200
Realized returns = Total returns - Initial inestment
= 4200 - 3000
= $1,200
Answer: $1,200
Answer:
Give an example of a situation in which a surplus of a product led to decreased prices. similarity, give a example of a situation in which a shortage led to increased prices. what eventually happened in each case? why?
In the course of having surplus of a product which decreases the price, this happens as a result of high competition as there many people selling the same products which in turns leads to crash in price in order to make sales and little profit.
while product shortage or scarcity happens as a result of decrease in resources or decrease in supply, hence; results into scarcity of products which eventually aids increment of price
Explanation:
I am willing to take AP classes if the classes will continue to help my knowledge grow and provide new learning experiences.
