Cival War Weapons :: essays research papers fc

Civil War Weapons One weapon used in the Civil War is a Sharps Carbine. It was developed primarily for Calvary, because of the shorter barrel. They were much easier to handle on horse back than their longer brother the Breech-Loader. Sharps were preferred because they could be loaded on a moving horse, something virtually impossible with a Muzzle-Loader. Also, Breech-Loaders carbine which fired moisture proof metallic cartridges, where more reliable than rifles that fired paper cartridges. As I said be fore it is easier to load a Sharps than a Muzzle-Loader. A Muzzle-Loader took 9 long hard steps just to fire one shot. Even the most skilled solder could only get three rounds off in a minute on the old Civil War Muzzle-Loader. And No wonder. After each shot you have to (1) steady the gun on the ground take out a new cartridge out of a belt pouch. (2) Tear open a piece of paper with your teeth. (3) Empty the powder in the barrel and insert a bullet in to the muzzle. (4) Draw the long â€Å"rummer† out of its carrying groove under the barrel. (5) ram the bullet all the way down. (6) Return the rod back to its groove. (7) Lift the weapon half-cocked the hammer. (8) Fully cock the hammer, aim, and finally,(9) fire. At the beginning of the war Southern Calvary was armed as well, if not better than the Northern counterpart. Carbines were in short supply in both armies. The rebels favorite weapon was a sawed off shotgun loaded with Buckshot. A farmland weapon. Saber a sword was only the Calvary and generally in the beginning of the war were used regularly and to their full extent Saber became marks of ranking later years and were abandoned in favor of efficient weapons. Canister is the weapon that killed the most soldiers in the war. Canister rounds are a artillery, fired from a canon, are a thinned walled metal cylinder packed with musket balls, or large lead or iron balls, and sawdust, some canisters that were found were packed with nails, pieces of hinges, and other scrap metal.

Dmi Field Service Case

Synopsis/purpose Field Service Divisions are important parts of organizations operating in manufacturing industries. As technology becomes more and more involved in the production process and the after sales services, it is crucial for companies to develop their Field Service business processes. In the DMI Field Service Case, the company has troubles meeting the customer demands in a timely manner. The quality of the service remains as an important task to improve for the DMI Company and we will be analyzing the issues related with the reengineering process of the FSD. . DMI should measure field service performance because the process needs a level of consistency. Even though every service call may be different, the processes that are not variable need to be controlled on a consistent level. Performance should be measured by customer feedback, number of service calls per day, and response time. 6. The division needs to make a process map to create a value stream and ensure that each step on the process there is value being added.If there is not value being added then that process needs to be cut. A process map will also show inefficiencies of the process as a whole. 7. This organization can become more of a learning organization if they were able to develop a team strictly made for continuous improvement. If this whole process seems to have all these inefficiencies then I believe it would be very worth is to create a continuous improvement team to exploit all these problems and create solutions and figure out the right path for their process map. 8.New Technologies – DMI should be able to open their horizons with some new technology especially because it’s management consists of mostly engineers. They need to be more proficient in technology management to gain trust and loyalty to customers. Call taker system – DMI’s service center receives an average of 3,500 calls per day. About 2,000 of those calls are related to emergency mainten ance. All of the calls are taken by approximately 40 call takers who earn â€Å" modest† wages and work staggered shifts to cover the workday for both oasts. This is causing low efficient rating and many people being put on hold. If they were to implement a customer code in the service center they would be much more efficient and timely with the calls. They could also hire more â€Å"call takers†. Dispatching center- There is an obvious lack of communication between the dispatchers and the techs. This migh be because there are 24 dispatchers in only 5 regional dispatch centers. Bringing these dispatch centers together could help communication and reduce delays.Performance Measurement – There system seems to be flawed due to the fact that they base their performance on target response time. This is a flaw because service tech may only go on 1 field work a day which doesn’t correctly show performance throughout the whole organization. Communication between the call centers and the techs are also no good because sometimes they don’t even call because they think they will have to wait on hold. So a new measurement system is definitely in need.

Philippines Annexation Essay

Although controversial to some, the Americans made the right decision to annex the Philippines after successfully freeing them from Spanish tyranny and rule. Without American rule and support, the Philippines would have been an easy target to be taken over by Germany, England or Japan who all would have savaged the land and further suppressed the people. The Filipinos were weak, inexperienced and not ready to establish their own government and self rule themselves. During the time of the annexation, the Americans needed a strategic place in that part of the world to protect their interests, expand their trading partners and show the world they were a power to be reckoned with in spreading democracy. So even though the annexation of the Philippines was views by some as doing the same things as some of the other major countries, the Americans always viewed it as a short term solution to educate the people, help them establish themselves to self rule and to allow them time to prepare to protect themselves from other enemies. At the time the decision to annex the Philippines was made, there were other countries waiting and ready to attack and takeover the control that Spain had lost to the Americans. American rule allowed human rights, freedoms and quality of life that would not have been possible had America walked away and allowed the fledgling country try and rule itself. Germany, England, Japan and even Spain would have jumped at the opportunity to take over control of the Philippines and its many resources. Many important and profitable trade routes utilized the Philippines as a gateway to trade their goods and wares. Although it was profitable for the Americans to control this area and have access to the trade routes and resources, they were helping prepare the Filipinos to one day self rule and govern themselves as a free and independent country. Definitely not an opportunity they would have gained under rule of one of the other dominant and brutal governments. As Albert Beveridge so eloquently stated in â€Å"The March of the Flag† speech, â€Å"We can not retreat from any soil where Providence has unfurled our banner, it is ours to save†¦ for liberty and civilization. Having been brutalized  and controlled for so many years under the tyranny control of Spain and its leaders, the Filipinos were ill prepared and ready to set up their own government and rule for themselves. There would not have been any experienced and supported leader that would have gained the support of most Filipinos. This would have led to fractions fighting, internal battles and weakness within the country. These conditions would have made the Philippines an easy target to be retaken and lose their path to independence they had by being annexed by the Americans. The Americans trained their leaders, helped establish an internal military as well as set up a military base that helped to protect their people from outside attacks and takeovers from other coun tries. Even though others like Abraham Lincoln stated â€Å"that no man is good enough to govern another man without that other’s consent,† leaving the Philippines to be savaged by others would have been much worse for the Filipinos than the temporary annexation by the Americans. During the time the Americans defeated the Spaniards and gained control over Cuba and the Philippines, the world was in constant battle. Many of the powerful countries were trying to expand, conquer and takeover weaker countries and lands. The Americans who believe in democracy and freedom for people knew that they had to show their strength and protect others in the process. The part of the world where the Philippines lies was one of the most volatile and dangerous in the world. That being said, it also had some of the most profitable trade routes, richest resources and was a vital part of the world to have a stronghold. By following through with the annexation of the Philippines, the Americans were able to gain a stronghold on the other side of the world, enrich themselves by gaining access to the valuable resources that were so plentiful and to take the time to help spread freedom and democracy. William McKinley clearly believed and stated that â€Å" we could not turn them over to France and Germany – our commercial rivals in the Orient – that would be bad business and discreditable.† There were many arguments as to the merits of annexing the Philippines or to walk away and grant them their immediate freedom. The Filipinos had been tormented, had their land savaged and destroyed by Spain for so long, there was truly only one humane and correct decision and that was to annex the Philippines. The Americans although financially gained from the decision, never waivered from their long-term commitment to help to train, educate and prepare the Filipinos to  self-rule and govern. Establishing a stronghold in that part of the world helped the Americans establish themselves as a world power and leader in personal freedoms and spreading of democratic governments. With America and its military located on the Philippines they were able to protect the Filipinos from attacks from others with bad intentions such as Germany, England, Japan and Spain. During the time of American annexation, the Filipinos united together, learned the skills necessary to survive and protect themselves from others and over time gained the long-term independence and freedom they never would have secured if not for the annexation of the Americans.

Culture and Civilization

Culture and Civilization According to anthropologists of 19th century, Culture is earlier and Civilization is later. Everything created by man is culture, civilization is an advanced state of cultural development. Culture developed in three stages: Savagery >> Barbarianism >> Civilization (Acts of cruel and violent behavior) (Extremely cruel and unpleasant behavior) Alfred Louis Kroeber said Culture is super organic, he has given three forms of culture namely Social Culture (Status and Role), Value Culture (Philosophy, Morals) and Reality Culture (Science and Technology, etc).According to Kroeber civilization is a part of reality culture. Robert Redfield said culture is a totality of traditions and civilization is a totality of great and little traditions. Culture: The collective appearance of customs, faith, art, language, way of thinking and way of living of a particular group of people. And civilization is the developed part, when different cultures meet. Difference between Cultur e and Civilization, Sociologists View Culture| Civilization| Culture includes religion, art philosophy, literature, music, dance, etc. hich brings satisfaction and pleasure to many. It is the expression of final aspects of life. | Civilization includes all those things by means of which some other objective is attained. Type writers, motors, etc. come under this category. Civilization consists of technology or the authority of man over natural phenomenon as well as social technology which control man's behavior. | Culture is what we are. | Civilization is what we have. | Culture has no standard of measurement because it is an end in itself. Civilization has a precised standard of measurement. The universal standard of civilization is utility because civilization is a means. | Culture cannot be said to be advancing. It cannot be asserted that the art, literature, thoughts are ideals of today’s and superior to those of past. | Civilization is always advancing. The various const ituents of civilizations namely machines, means of transportation, communication, etc. are constantly progressive. | Culture is internal and an end. It is related to internal thoughts, feelings, ideals, values, etc.It is like the soul of an individual. | Civilization is external and a means. It is the means for the expression and manifestation of the grandness, it is like the body of an individual. | Difference between Culture and Civilization, Anthropologists View Culture| Civilization| All societies have culture. | Only a few societies have civilization. | Culture is earlier. | Civilization is later. | Culture is pre-condition for civilization to develop. | Civilization represents a stage of cultural advancement. | Culture is super organic. Civilization is a part of reality culture. | Culture is a totality of traditions. | Civilization is a totality of great and little traditions. | Culture Vs Civilization Firstly, civilization in theory is bigger than culture in which an entire c ivilization can encompass one single unit of culture. Civilization is a bigger unit than culture because it is a complex aggregate of the society that dwells within a certain area, along with its forms of government, norms, and even culture. Thus, culture is just a spec or a portion of an entire civilization.For example, the Egyptian civilization has an Egyptian culture in the same way as the Greek civilization has their Greek culture. A culture ordinarily exists within a civilization. In this regard, each civilization can contain not only one but several cultures. Comparing culture and civilization is like showing the difference between language and the country to which it is being used. Culture can exist in itself whereas civilization cannot be called a civilization if it does not possess a certain culture.It’s just like asking how a nation can exist on its own without the use of a medium of communication. Hence, a civilization will become empty if it does not have its cult ure, no matter how little it is. Culture can be something that is tangible and it can also be something that isn’t. Culture can become a physical material if it is a product of the beliefs, customs and practices of a certain people with a definite culture. But a civilization is something that can be seen as a whole and it is more or less tangible although its basic components, like culture, can be mmaterial. Culture can be learned and in the same manner it can also be transmitted from one generation to the next. Using a medium of speech and communication, it is possible for a certain type of culture to evolve and even be inherited by another group of people. On the other hand, civilization cannot be transferred by mere language alone. Because of its complexity and magnitude, you need to transfer all of the raw aggregates of a civilization for it to be entirely passed on. It just grows, degrades and may eventually end if all its subunits will fail.Summary: 1. Culture is by def inition smaller than a civilization. 2. Culture can grow and exist without residing in a formal civilization whereas a civilization will never grow and exist without the element of culture. 3. Culture can be tangible or intangible whereas civilization is something that is more tangible because it is what you see as a whole 4. Culture can be transmitted through symbols in the form of language whereas an entire civilization cannot be transmitted by mere language alone.

How far is Odysseus’s status Essay

Throughout the Odyssey, Odysseus is portrayed as a Greek hero. However this can be contradicted. In many events Odysseus can be perceived as un-heroic at times. Therefore the above statement can be argued. Throughout this piece of work I will be discussing this statement and I will gradually draw closer to a conclusion. Odysseus shows leadership as he produces very clever ideas and performs quick-thinking actions. Throughout the narrative he has planned strategies, for example, every time Odysseus and his men reach an island he always sends his men first to investigate the surroundings. This quality can be seen as cunning and therefore he can be seen as a hero. His personality can be seen as caring and scheming. In many periods of the book this can be proved. He stays calm in situations and when his men die he thinks of them, and when in trouble he does his best to help them says quote, â€Å"we travelled with heavy hearts, grieving for the loss of our dear friends†¦.. † (Book 10 Line 133) Odysseus can be seen as resourceful, for example, he tool the undiluted wine with him when going into the Cyclops’s cave, which then later came into use as it saved his men and himself escape to safety. He is seen as shrewd as he uses a false name when speaking with the Cyclops which again later on takes its effect when the men are absconding from the dangers of the Cyclops. Even though Odysseus can be seen as a hero, in some cases he cannot be depicted as cunning. For example, he decided to ignore his crew’s suggestion to escape with the food in the Cyclops’s cave. Even though he was right to do the hospitable and respectable thing to do, by staying in the cave to greet their ‘host’, he made the wrong decision as the by staying he risked the lives of his men. Odysseus can be thought of as violent as he blinded Polyphemus with a stake. This could be looked at as un-heroic and wrong, but it can also be seen as him being vengeful for his killed crew. Therefore these different situations can be looked at from two perspectives. He could be seen as hospitable and vengeful, which are true qualities of a hero, or he can be looked at as a violent person who has bad judgement. It all depends on the reader’s standpoint. Odysseus has a very strong relationship with the Gods, especially with Athenes and Hermes. For example Hermes helped Odysseus by giving him the moly flower. This can be looked at from two angles. Odysseus might seem not so heroic as he needs help from the powers that be, and he might be seen as dependent on the Gods. But this can be argued as only some people would think that only a hero can receive such gifts from the gods and that there has to be something special about him, and also Athene was known for helping heroes which could prove that he was one. Therefore, again, this line of reasoning could be argued. Odysseus and his men have lack trust and confidence in their relationships. This reflects badly upon Odysseus as it shows he is not leadership material. For example When Odysseus and his men sailed away from the Island of Aelia, Odysseus had received the gift of the winds. His crew did not trust Odysseus and opened the bag, thinking it was gold, and released the winds. This shows a lack of trust. Another example that shows a requirement of confidence in their relationship is when one of Odysseus’s men, Eurylochus, says â€Å"You will never come back yourself and won’t rescue a single man of your crew. I am certain of it. Let you get away quickly with those that are left here. â€Å"(Book 10 Line 268). This shows that his men think that their destiny with Odysseus will lead to death. They feel as if his leadership is endangering them which shows that they do not think of him as a hero and influences the reader to think the same, even though Odysseus tries his best and up most to rescue his men In my opinion, I think that Odysseus is a heroic figure. This is because in the book he is proved to be cunning, caring and an important figure. There are many events in the book that contradict this, but they can be argued to whether Odysseus was really in the wrong. For example, he wanted to stay in Polyphemus’s cave because he wanted to be hospitable (which is the right thing to do), and he was not aware of the dangers that were at hand. He can be seen as violent, but revenge was his only motivation, when he blinded the Cyclops. Therefore, I think that Odysseus can be categorised under ‘hero’, and I think that Odysseus’s status throughout the Odyssey all depends on how the reader interprets the events that take place as they always have two aspects to look at.

Chuck Close And Photorealism Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Chuck Close And Photorealism - Research Paper Example A graduate of the Yale University School of Art and once a teacher of arts in University of Massachusetts, Chuck Close became a significant figure in artistic society of the latter half of the twentieth century known for his remarkable style of painting large-scale portraits. â€Å"Close learned to paint like an Abstract Expressionist when he was a student at Yale† . Yet, while the painter’s preferences in his tuition years centered mainly on abstract impressionism, training in Europe and the MFA program have added a pinch of more modern trends including minimalism and pop art. However, the artists managed to choose the domain for his work rather early: human faces and their versatile portrayals in photography and paint became the major course for the artist’s development, while the painterly style and instruments changed for several times. During his teaching career in Amherst, the painter experimented with pop-inspired elements in portraiture, engaging photogra phic images for the first time in his work: those were the daring and large realistic pictures of nude models including Bid Nude of 1967. However, it was his Big Self-Portrait that served as an important milestone in development of his style, for this painting literally opened the series of the famous photorealistic ‘heads’ on a larger-than-life scale and with exaggerated and unflattering manner of depiction, his friends and family as models, first in grayscale and then in color. Later period of Close’ work was marked by domination of pointillism.

Theorising Art, Media and Design Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Theorising Art, Media and Design - Essay Example It advocates their independence and their role in the society – a role which is more than that inside the household (Chodorow). This paper will discuss feminism in the context of visual culture and the means by which this particular movement was theorized and historicized in the past three centuries. Before delving into the discussion of the historiography of the femininity in the context of visual arts, it is appropriate to explain the projection of women in contemporary art by citing varying texts published by feminist writers. In particular, this research will use Amelia Jones’ book, The Feminism and Visual Culture Reader, as its primary basis for said study. Jones’ work focuses on the collates different accounts and writings concerning art, film, architecture, popular culture, new media, and other visual fields in the point of view of feminist thinkers and writers. The author describes feminism as, â€Å"... in most of its forms, proposes and demands a polit ical and/or ethical stance towards cultural experience...† (Jones 2). She also argues that the presence of visual culture, â€Å"... is a rubric and a model of critical thinking about the world of images saturating contemporary life.† (Jones 2). ... of critical models of reading visual imagery in visual culture and its related disciplines of art history, film theory, television studies, and the visually oriented arm of media, new media and culture studies.† (Jones 3). There is no need to explain what had been cited from the work of the author. She directly applies the leading role of such movement in contemporary forms of art and media. However well established feminism is as a major movement that advocates the emphasis of the female gender in a patriarchal society, the depiction of femininity and its degradation in some visual arts has had a lengthy discourse. According to Judith Butler in the book, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity, â€Å"The notion of an original or primary gender identity is often parodied within the cultural practices of drag, cross-dressing and the sexual stylization of butch/femme identities. Within the feminist theory, such parodic identities have been understood to be either degrading to women...† (187). Butler makes clear that not all contemporary art can be beneficial to the cause of women empowerment. The example that she had presented gives light to the misuse of the feminist movement which had inevitably resulted to the lampooning of the feminine gender. Indeed when the ideological basis of feminism is used but the medium of expression is deformed, the outcome may cause harm to the ultimate goal of uplifting femininity as gender in the arts. If Jones depicts feminism as the major player in the context of contemporary visual arts and Butler argues that the proper expression of feminism in the mentioned media is a must, other feminist writers regard that feminism in visual arts can create liberal and complex image of the female subject. Judith Williamson