BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Airplane mechanical faliure

Expert replies
by abhishekpandey2002 » Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:08 pm
Investigators concluded that human failure was not responsible for the fatal airplane crash last August, and since that time new and more stringent rules for identifying and reporting mechanical problems have been in effect. That accounts for the fact that reports of airplane mechanical problems have increased in frequency by 50 percent since last August.
Which one of the following is an assumption underlying the argument in the passage?
(A) Airplane travel is still relatively safe, despite the increase in reported mechanical problems.
(B) Mechanical problems in airplanes have increased dramatically since last August.
(C) Mechanical problems in airplanes have not increased by 50 percent since last August.
(D) Airlines are less reluctant to report mechanical problems than they previously were.
(E) Mechanical problems in airplanes have become easier to detect since last August.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by HSPA » Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:18 pm
IMO E

pilots are good, more mech problems are found for SURE.. means new stringent rules are helping find mech problems

2.30sec
First take: 640 (50M, 27V) - RC needs 300% improvement
Second take: coming soon..
Regards,
HSPA.
Join the discussion

by abhishekpandey2002 » Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:19 pm
Try again....
Join the discussion

by MartinK » Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:20 pm
I think C, because the most important thing to compare if something is relevant or if an action made something better is that the situation is the same as it was before. Therefore, we have to assume that the number of mechanical problems is the same and then we implement the action/policy and see how it works.
Last edited by MartinK on Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Join the discussion

by abhishekpandey2002 » Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:23 pm
Absolutely right MartinK ...Can you please explain the reasoning....
Join the discussion

by HSPA » Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:23 pm
Only D and E are worth for options... I answer is above these two... I need OE
First take: 640 (50M, 27V) - RC needs 300% improvement
Second take: coming soon..
Regards,
HSPA.
Join the discussion

by MartinK » Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:25 pm
abhishekpandey2002 wrote:Absolutely right MartinK ...Can you please explain the reasoning....
I edited my post, hope it helps.
Join the discussion

by sandy217 » Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:33 pm
abhishekpandey2002 wrote:Investigators concluded that human failure was not responsible for the fatal airplane crash last August, and since that time new and more stringent rules for identifying and reporting mechanical problems have been in effect. That accounts for the fact that reports of airplane mechanical problems have increased in frequency by 50 percent since last August.
Which one of the following is an assumption underlying the argument in the passage?
(A) Airplane travel is still relatively safe, despite the increase in reported mechanical problems.
(B) Mechanical problems in airplanes have increased dramatically since last August.
(C) Mechanical problems in airplanes have not increased by 50 percent since last August.
(D) Airlines are less reluctant to report mechanical problems than they previously were.
(E) Mechanical problems in airplanes have become easier to detect since last August.

Answer must be C.
If number of mechanical problems have increased by 50%, what is the role of stringent rules in identifying mechanical problems. So it is assumed mechanical problems remained constant(atleast less than 50%) but still because of stringent rules more than 50% problems were detected.
Join the discussion

by rohu27 » Wed Apr 06, 2011 1:27 am
IMO C
the author says X(change in rules) is the cause for Y(more mechanical prblems)
it may also be that the problems may have *Acually* increased over the year?
this is what option C gives us, the author assumes that the problems did not increase. if they did increase, the author's conclusion will not be valid.
Join the discussion