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

Redeem

CR Satellite Cost Forecast

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

CR Satellite Cost Forecast

by mundasingh123 » Tue Jul 26, 2011 8:13 am
A recent spate of launching and operating mishaps with television satellites led to a corresponding surge in claims against companies underwriting satellite insurance. As a result, insurance premiums shot up, making satellites more expensive to launch and operate. This, in turn, has added to the pressure to squeeze more performance out of currently operating satellites.
Which of the following, if true, taken together with the information above, best supports the conclusion that the cost of television satellites will continue to increase?
A. Since the risk to insurers of satellites is spread over relatively few units, insurance premiums are necessarily very high.
B. When satellites reach orbit and then fail, the causes of failure are generally impossible to pinpoint with confidence.
C. The greater the performance demands placed on satellites, the more frequently those satellites break down.
D. Most satellites are produced in such small numbers that no economies of scale can be realized.
E. Since many satellites are built by unwieldy international consortia, inefficiencies are inevitable.
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 2789
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:19 am
Location: Chennai, India
Thanked: 206 times
Followed by:43 members
GMAT Score:640

by GmatKiss » Tue Jul 26, 2011 8:32 am
IMO:C

A: Since the risk to insurers of satellites is spread over relatively few units, insurance premiums are necessarily very high -- Already known from the passage
B: When satellites reach orbit and then fail, the causes of failure are generally impossible to pinpoint with confidence. -- Irrelevant
C: The greater the performance demands placed on satellites, the more frequently those satellites break down --- Hence, insurance and the operating costs will increase and we will make more satellites to encounter this, means more money invested in newer satellites.D: Most satellites are produced in such small numbers that no economies of scale can be realized. -- Irrelevant
E: Since many satellites are built by unwieldy international consortia, inefficiencies are inevitable. --- False, cannot be taken into account.


By the way is the OA: C ??
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:22 pm
Thanked: 112 times
Followed by:13 members

by smackmartine » Tue Jul 26, 2011 8:54 am
IMO C

The logic behind the argument is that adding performance to satellite keep pushing the cost of these satellites because of some reason.We have to find a reason to support this cycle of increasing cost.
We can find the traditional approach to get to the right answer throughout many forums. However, if I were under time crunch , I would use process of elimination to get to the correct answer.

GMAT hates extreme ideas. Even if someone stumbles over such kind of convoluted arguments, he can leverage GMAT's take on extreme ideas.

A. Since the risk to insurers of satellites is spread over relatively few units, insurance premiums are necessarily very high.
B. When satellites reach orbit and then fail, the causes of failure are generally impossible to pinpoint with confidence.
C. The greater the performance demands placed on satellites, the more frequently those satellites break down.
D. Most satellites are produced in such small numbers that no economies of scale can be realized.
E. Since many satellites are built by unwieldy international consortia, inefficiencies are inevitable
Smack is Back ...
It takes time and effort to explain, so if my comment helped you please press Thanks button :)
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Tue Jul 26, 2011 9:51 am
OA is A .
Puzzled . Gobsmacked .
EDIT:sorry , OA is C Let me read thru ur post
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Tue Jul 26, 2011 10:49 am
smackmartine wrote:IMO C

The logic behind the argument is that adding performance to satellite keep pushing the cost of these satellites because of some reason.We have to find a reason to support this cycle of increasing cost.
We can find the traditional approach to get to the right answer throughout many forums. However, if I were under time crunch , I would use process of elimination to get to the correct answer.

GMAT hates extreme ideas. Even if someone stumbles over such kind of convoluted arguments, he can leverage GMAT's take on extreme ideas.

A. Since the risk to insurers of satellites is spread over relatively few units, insurance premiums are necessarily very high.
B. When satellites reach orbit and then fail, the causes of failure are generally impossible to pinpoint with confidence.
C. The greater the performance demands placed on satellites, the more frequently those satellites break down.
D. Most satellites are produced in such small numbers that no economies of scale can be realized.
E. Since many satellites are built by unwieldy international consortia, inefficiencies are inevitable
That the GMAT hates strong answers is only true for Must Be true questions ,which include Main Point ,Conclusion ,Flaw in Reasoning etc . This is a weaken question .
We must accept each of the given options as true
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:22 pm
Thanked: 112 times
Followed by:13 members

by smackmartine » Tue Jul 26, 2011 11:09 am
I know we must accept each answer in strengthening /weakening ?s, but I have mentioned that I did not apply any Traditional thinking , and I did say "If I were in a Time crunch" :)
Smack is Back ...
It takes time and effort to explain, so if my comment helped you please press Thanks button :)
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Tue Jul 26, 2011 11:15 am
smackmartine wrote:I know we must accept each answer in strengthening /weakening ?s, but I have mentioned that I did not apply any Traditional thinking , and I did say "If I were in a Time crunch" :)
Could you apply some traditional concepts to this CR
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 253
Joined: Fri Dec 26, 2008 8:39 pm
Thanked: 8 times
Followed by:1 members

by BlindVision » Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:13 pm
mundasingh123 wrote:A recent spate of launching and operating mishaps with television satellites led to a corresponding surge in claims against companies underwriting satellite insurance. As a result, insurance premiums shot up, making satellites more expensive to launch and operate. This, in turn, has added to the pressure to squeeze more performance out of currently operating satellites.
Which of the following, if true, taken together with the information above, best supports the conclusion that the cost of television satellites will continue to increase?
A. Since the risk to insurers of satellites is spread over relatively few units, insurance premiums are necessarily very high.
B. When satellites reach orbit and then fail, the causes of failure are generally impossible to pinpoint with confidence.
C. The greater the performance demands placed on satellites, the more frequently those satellites break down.
D. Most satellites are produced in such small numbers that no economies of scale can be realized.
E. Since many satellites are built by unwieldy international consortia, inefficiencies are inevitable.
C
Life is a Test
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1