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!
A board of directors<span> is elected by the stockholders of a corporation to oversee its general operation and set long-term objectives. A board of directors can serve for a for-profit business, non-profit business, or on a government agency. The board of directors are voted in and recognized as important decision makers. </span>
Answer: 1. 18 times
2. Park is in better position
Explanation:
1. Times interest earned is a financial ratio that measures interest coverage. It's essentially to check if a company can pay it's debt payments and is calculated by either EBIT or EBITDA divided by the total interest expense. The higher the better and anything above 2.5 times is usually considered.
Calculating would therefore be,
= $6,120,000 /$340,000
= 18 times.
2. As mentioned in the first answer, for the Times interest earned, the higher it is, the more favourable it is. So Park Company will be considered safer and are most definitely in a better or worse position than its competitor to make interest payments if the economy turns bad. The fact that theirs is 18 means that they can pay off their interest expense 5 times more than their competitor who can only repay 12 times.
If you need any clarification do comment.
Microsoft<span> was </span>considered a monopoly in the late 90's because <span>there was effectively no other option than to use Windows, so Windows </span><span>had </span>monopoly market power, especially in the <span>"Business Operating System" market.</span>
<span>Microsoft could set prices for users, and dictate user's behavior.
</span>
