Critical Reasoning

The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is that a used plane can be bought for one-third the price of the train line, and the plane, which is just as fast, can fly anywhere. The train would be a fixed linear system, and we live in a world that is spreading out in all directions and in which consumers choose the free-wheel systems (cars, buses, aircraft), which do not have fixed routes. Thus a sufficient market for the train will not exist.

Which of the following, if true, most severely weakens the argument presented above?


(A) Cars, buses, and planes require the efforts of drivers and pilots to guide them, whereas the train will be
guided mechanically.
(B) Cars and buses are not nearly as fast as the high-speed train will be.
(C) Planes are not a free-wheel system because they can fly only between airports, which are less convenient for consumers than the high-speed train's stations would be.
(D) The high-speed train line cannot use currently underutilized train stations in large cities.
(E) For long trips, most people prefer to fly rather than to take ground-level transportation.

IMO: C

IMO, C as well.

C correctly identifies that although planes can fly anywhere in the sky, their landing places are limited to the air ports which means that passengers have the same problems that they will have with trains.

Hence, the market for the trains may not cease to exist.

Hey, that's my post above!! I don't know how I logged onto that account but realized only after posting the answer!

IMO C , OA pls?

answer should be C, as we need to prove that sufficient market WILL exist for HS trains. ONly option C seems correct

I also agree it's C... but what is the OA?