Confused

This topic has expert replies
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 7:45 am
Thanked: 1 times

Confused

by ellexay » Sat Feb 07, 2009 1:13 pm
More airplane accidents are caused by pilot error than any other single factor. The military recently stopped requiring its pilots to obtain immunization shots against chemical warfare agents. These shots are known to cause unpredictable dizzy spells which can result in pilot error. Since many military pilots also pilot commercial passenger airliners, the reason for the military's decision must have been to reduce the number of commercial airline accidents.

Which of the following, if true, provides most support for the conclusion drawn above?


a. Recently, more pilots have been volunteering for the immunization shots.

b. All commercial airline flights are piloted by two co-pilots, whereas military flights are usually piloted by only one.

c. Chemical warfare is likely to escalate in the future.

d. Military pilots are choosing to resign rather than obtain the immunization shots.

e. Recently, the number of military pilots also piloting commercial airliners has declined.

The correct answer is (C). The argument concludes that the reason for the military's decision was to reduce pilot error during commercial flights. (C) is the only answer choice that supports this conclusion. Given that chemical warfare is likely to escalate in the future, it would seem that the military would continue to require immunization shots. But the military stopped requiring the shots. So the military's decision must have been based on some factor outweighing the potential danger of chemical warfare to pilots. One such possible factor is the increased danger of commercial airline accidents resulting from the immunization shots.

I am very confused by this explanation. My answer of last resort was B, which I thought made the most sense out of any of them...
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Legendary Member
Posts: 1404
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 6:55 pm
Thanked: 18 times
Followed by:2 members

by tanviet » Sat Feb 07, 2009 7:18 pm
I dislike this question. where this one come from?

we should study quality questions from OG or retired test

Legendary Member
Posts: 594
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 11:51 pm
Thanked: 12 times

by nervesofsteel » Sun Feb 08, 2009 4:52 am
C should be the ans...

only C says if the dependency on the shots will increase in future then there is a need of reduction now.. because more military pilots are flying commercial airlines .. So reduction in shots today will help commercial pilots in future ... by preventing them in future when chemical warfare will increase

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 7:45 am
Thanked: 1 times

by ellexay » Sun Feb 08, 2009 10:22 am
the question comes from a Petersen practice test. I still don't agree with C. While the answer might "make sense," it does NOT answer the question of providing the most support for the conclusion.

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 3380
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:20 am
Thanked: 2256 times
Followed by:1535 members
GMAT Score:800

by lunarpower » Sun Feb 08, 2009 1:36 pm
ellexay wrote:the question comes from a Petersen practice test. I still don't agree with C. While the answer might "make sense," it does NOT answer the question of providing the most support for the conclusion.
unfortunately, it does.
remember that "provides the most support" means just that: the most support. if all four of the other answer choices provide zero support, then a fifth answer choice that bolsters the argument at all, no matter by how little, wins by default.

--

according to the passage, a significant # of pilots fly both military and commercial aircraft. therefore, the idea of the problem is that we have to figure out which concerns - commercial vs. military - lie at the heart of the quoted policy.

therefore:
if a quoted reason points to the idea that the policy is motivated by commercial concerns, or NOT motivated by military concerns, then it strengthens the argument.

if a quoted reason points to the idea that the policy is motivated by military concerns, or NOT motivated by commercial concerns, then it weakens the argument.

--

(a) and (e) are irrelevant to this issue.
volunteering for the shots is outside the purview of the question, which is concerned only with requiring the shots.
numbers of pilots are completely irrelevant.

if (d) is true, it supports the idea that the policy is aimed at retaining military pilot. this would mean that military, not commercial, concerns lie at the heart of the policy, weakening the argument.

if (b) is true, then pilots' dizzy spells will have less of an effect on commercial flights, because of the presence of co-pilots. this would mean that commercial concerns are less important to the policy than are military concerns, weakening the argument.

this leaves (c) by process of elimination, since all of the other choices are either irrelevant or detrimental to the argument.

(c) is the best choice anyway, because it shows that military concerns DO NOT motivate the policy, or, at least, that the policy is at odds with clear military objectives (cancelling anti-chemical-warfare immunizations vs. escalating chemical warfare).
as noted above, this strengthens the argument, because it must then be true that commercial concerns DO motivate the policy.

--

choice (c) isn't perfect, but it's definitely the best of the five choices. you'll find that this happens much more than you'd like on CR problems.
Ron has been teaching various standardized tests for 20 years.

--

Pueden hacerle preguntas a Ron en castellano
Potete chiedere domande a Ron in italiano
On peut poser des questions à Ron en français
Voit esittää kysymyksiä Ron:lle myös suomeksi

--

Quand on se sent bien dans un vêtement, tout peut arriver. Un bon vêtement, c'est un passeport pour le bonheur.

Yves Saint-Laurent

--

Learn more about ron

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 49
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2009 4:53 pm
Thanked: 3 times
Followed by:1 members

by mkbigmoz » Sun Feb 08, 2009 5:57 pm
lunarpower wrote:
ellexay wrote:the question comes from a Petersen practice test. I still don't agree with C. While the answer might "make sense," it does NOT answer the question of providing the most support for the conclusion.


if (b) is true, then pilots' dizzy spells will have less of an effect on commercial flights, because of the presence of co-pilots. this would mean that commercial concerns are less important to the policy than are military concerns, weakening the argument.

Thanks....Im still a bit confused with C, but I'll work through it

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 30
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 9:34 pm

by Shivani Varma » Mon Feb 09, 2009 3:32 am
The Army has left it up to the pilots to take the shots as compared with earlier when it was mandatoryfor pilots to take them. This has been done mainly for commercial flights.

THe conclusion is that it was done for commercial flights and not for millitary flights

a) More have been voluntering does'nt say anything
b)No connection
c) Chemical warfare is increasing and yet the mandatory requirement has been removed. There has obviously been done keeping in mind the commercial pilots. Therefore "C" is the correct answer!
d)Does not support the conclusion
e)Does not support the conclusion

Try to keep it simple

find the conclusion then just see whether the options are supporting it or not!!

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 108
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 3:00 am

by graem83d » Sun May 15, 2016 2:53 am
I still feel C should be the answer