Since the deregulation of airlines, delays at the nation's i

Expert replies

varun289: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 298; Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2012 6:42 amFollowed by: 7 members; Location: New delhi; Thanked: 10 times; GMAT Score:590

by varun289 » Sun Apr 28, 2013 8:06 pm

Since the deregulation of airlines, delays at the nation's increasingly busy airports have increased by 25 percent.
To combat this problem, more of the takeoff and landing slots at the busiest airports must be allocated to
commercial airlines. Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the effectiveness of the
solution proposed above?
A. The major causes of delays at the nation's busiest airports are bad weather and overtaxed air traffic control
equipment.
B. Since airline deregulation began, the number of airplanes in operation has increased by 25 percent.
C. Over 60 percent of the takeoff and landing slots at the nation's busiest airports are reserved for commercial
airlines.
D. After a small midwestern airport doubled its allocation of takeoff and landing slots, the number of delays that
were reported decreased by 50 percent.
E. Since deregulation the average length of delay at the nation's busiest airports has doubled.

IMO - c , while OA -a how????

Like this post

Source: Beat The GMAT — Critical Reasoning | Sun Apr 28, 2013 8:06 pm

fifafreak: Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts; Posts: 15; Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 3:47 am; Thanked: 2 times

by fifafreak » Mon Apr 29, 2013 6:08 am

varun289 wrote:Since the deregulation of airlines, delays at the nation's increasingly busy airports have increased by 25 percent.
To combat this problem, more of the takeoff and landing slots at the busiest airports must be allocated to
commercial airlines. Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the effectiveness of the
solution proposed above?
A. The major causes of delays at the nation's busiest airports are bad weather and overtaxed air traffic control
equipment.
B. Since airline deregulation began, the number of airplanes in operation has increased by 25 percent.
C. Over 60 percent of the takeoff and landing slots at the nation's busiest airports are reserved for commercial
airlines.
D. After a small midwestern airport doubled its allocation of takeoff and landing slots, the number of delays that
were reported decreased by 50 percent.
E. Since deregulation the average length of delay at the nation's busiest airports has doubled.

IMO - c , while OA -a how????

Due to deregulation, delay increased by 25%. On increasing commercial slots, the delay should decrease. However, if the delays are not due to lack of commercial airlines at all, they will not decrease and hence cast a serious doubt on the solution provided.

Like this post

umeshpatil: Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts; Posts: 79; Joined: Wed May 23, 2012 7:23 pm; Thanked: 10 times

)

by umeshpatil » Mon Apr 29, 2013 12:39 pm

Deregulation of Airport => Delays increased by 25 %.
Allocate more landing-takeoff slots to commercial planes=>reduction in time consumed during takeoff and landing,

To weaken this we can say that delay is not due to planes or any mechanical arrangement, but due to other natural factor.

Option (A) is correct answer.

Like this post

David@VeritasPrep: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 2193; Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:30 pmFollowed by: 512 members; Location: Vermont and Boston, MA; Thanked: 1186 times; GMAT Score:770

by David@VeritasPrep » Mon Apr 29, 2013 5:09 pm

If you have a plan question such as this one, you can weaken the effectiveness of the plan if you show that the plan is not caused by the cause that the question assumes.

For example, this question makes the assumption that the cause of the delays is a lack of spots for commercial airlines. What if instead of a lack of spots the problem is in another area - such as weather, or delays with baggage or passenger loading? The increased spots will not combat this...

You mention choice C - here is my question for you - Is over 60% of the spots reserved for commercial airlines a lot of spots? Is it not that many? How many would you expect? Do you see the problem here? This is information that may or may not actually weaken the plan - depending on information that you do not have....

Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course

Like this post

vigneshahob: Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts; Posts: 5; Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:33 am

by vigneshahob » Wed May 01, 2013 12:32 am

The answer is very doubtful. There must be an explanation why before de-regulation there was not much delays and after deregulation event there is an increase in delays.
The option A is very general. Did the climate change after the deregulation event ?

What is the source ?

David@VeritasPrep wrote:If you have a plan question such as this one, you can weaken the effectiveness of the plan if you show that the plan is not caused by the cause that the question assumes.

For example, this question makes the assumption that the cause of the delays is a lack of spots for commercial airlines. What if instead of a lack of spots the problem is in another area - such as weather, or delays with baggage or passenger loading? The increased spots will not combat this...

You mention choice C - here is my question for you - Is over 60% of the spots reserved for commercial airlines a lot of spots? Is it not that many? How many would you expect? Do you see the problem here? This is information that may or may not actually weaken the plan - depending on information that you do not have....

Like this post

David@VeritasPrep: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 2193; Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:30 pmFollowed by: 512 members; Location: Vermont and Boston, MA; Thanked: 1186 times; GMAT Score:770

by David@VeritasPrep » Wed May 01, 2013 5:23 am

This is an Official GMAT question!

It is question 16 from the Verbal Review 2nd edition.

Remember that you must assume that ALL answer choices are true. It says it there in the question, "Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt..."

So if it is true that the delays are weather and traffic control, well these extra takeoff and landing slots would not help with those problems.

Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course

Like this post

vigneshahob: Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts; Posts: 5; Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:33 am

by vigneshahob » Thu May 02, 2013 8:17 am

Thanks a lot David. Your responses are very clear.

vigneshahob wrote:The answer is very doubtful. There must be an explanation why before de-regulation there was not much delays and after deregulation event there is an increase in delays.
The option A is very general. Did the climate change after the deregulation event ?

What is the source ?
David@VeritasPrep wrote:If you have a plan question such as this one, you can weaken the effectiveness of the plan if you show that the plan is not caused by the cause that the question assumes.

For example, this question makes the assumption that the cause of the delays is a lack of spots for commercial airlines. What if instead of a lack of spots the problem is in another area - such as weather, or delays with baggage or passenger loading? The increased spots will not combat this...

You mention choice C - here is my question for you - Is over 60% of the spots reserved for commercial airlines a lot of spots? Is it not that many? How many would you expect? Do you see the problem here? This is information that may or may not actually weaken the plan - depending on information that you do not have....

Like this post

RBBmba@2014: Legendary Member; Posts: 944; Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 8:21 amFollowed by: 5 members; Thanked: 8 times

by RBBmba@2014 » Wed Apr 13, 2016 3:14 am

David@VeritasPrep wrote: You mention choice C - here is my question for you - Is over 60% of the spots reserved for commercial airlines a lot of spots? Is it not that many? How many would you expect? Do you see the problem here? This is information that may or may not actually weaken the plan - depending on information that you do not have....

Hi Verbal Experts (@VeritasPrep/others),
I'm still confused with choice C.

In a WEAKEN (or a STRENGTHEN) CR, I think, the correct choice will be a "MIGHT BE TRUE" option -- it doesn't need to be MUST BE TRUE. Right ?

Then how the choice C is INCORRECT, although it's a "MIGHT BE TRUE" option ?

Please help!

Like this post

DavidG@VeritasPrep: Legendary Member; Posts: 2663; Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:25 amFollowed by: 128 members; Location: Boston, MA; Thanked: 1153 times; GMAT Score:770

by DavidG@VeritasPrep » Wed May 11, 2016 6:41 am

RBBmba@2014 wrote:
David@VeritasPrep wrote: You mention choice C - here is my question for you - Is over 60% of the spots reserved for commercial airlines a lot of spots? Is it not that many? How many would you expect? Do you see the problem here? This is information that may or may not actually weaken the plan - depending on information that you do not have....
Hi Verbal Experts (@VeritasPrep/others),
I'm still confused with choice C.

In a WEAKEN (or a STRENGTHEN) CR, I think, the correct choice will be a "MIGHT BE TRUE" option -- it doesn't need to be MUST BE TRUE. Right ?

Then how the choice C is INCORRECT, although it's a "MIGHT BE TRUE" option ?

Please help!

I received a PM asking about this one.

You're right that when we get a weaken question, we're not weighing the likelihood that a given answer choice is true, but rather, attempting to determine what impact the answer choice, if true, will have on a plan or conclusion.

In this case we're trying to weaken the conclusion that allocating more takeoff and landing space to commercial airlines will help mitigate delays.

Answer choice C: Over 60 percent of the takeoff and landing slots at the nation's busiest airports are reserved for commercial
airlines. This doesn't weaken the conclusion. If, at the time the airports are dealing with delays, 65% of the runways are allocated to commercial airlines, bumping that number up to, say, 90%, could very well address the problem if the issue is a commercial airline bottleneck. That 60% figure is totally arbitrary. But if the issue is bad weather (answer choice A) no amount of increased runway space is going to do anything to get people in the air any faster.

Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course

Like this post

RBBmba@2014: Legendary Member; Posts: 944; Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 8:21 amFollowed by: 5 members; Thanked: 8 times

by RBBmba@2014 » Wed May 11, 2016 7:52 am

DavidG@VeritasPrep wrote:You're right that when we get a weaken question, we're not weighing the likelihood that a given answer choice is true, but rather, attempting to determine what impact the answer choice, if true, will have on a plan or conclusion.

In this case we're trying to weaken the conclusion that allocating more takeoff and landing space to commercial airlines will help mitigate delays.

Answer choice C: Over 60 percent of the takeoff and landing slots at the nation's busiest airports are reserved for commercial
airlines. This doesn't weaken the conclusion. If, at the time the airports are dealing with delays, 65% of the runways are allocated to commercial airlines, bumping that number up to, say, 90%, could very well address the problem if the issue is a commercial airline bottleneck. That 60% figure is totally arbitrary. But if the issue is bad weather (answer choice A) no amount of increased runway space is going to do anything to get people in the air any faster.

There goes my doubt - Over 60 percent could also mean say, 92% of the runways are allocated to commercial airlines. Right ?

So, in that case bumping that number up to, say, 97%, would NOT likely address the problem if the issue is a commercial airline bottleneck. Thus the CONCLUSION is WEAKENED.

Bottom-line: are we discarding the Option C because in one hand it seems to STRENGTHEN the CONCLUSION, on the other hand it seems to WEAKEN the CONCLUSION.

Last edited by RBBmba@2014 on Wed May 11, 2016 1:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Like this post

DavidG@VeritasPrep: Legendary Member; Posts: 2663; Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:25 amFollowed by: 128 members; Location: Boston, MA; Thanked: 1153 times; GMAT Score:770

by DavidG@VeritasPrep » Wed May 11, 2016 8:12 am

RBBmba@2014 wrote:
DavidG@VeritasPrep wrote:You're right that when we get a weaken question, we're not weighing the likelihood that a given answer choice is true, but rather, attempting to determine what impact the answer choice, if true, will have on a plan or conclusion.

In this case we're trying to weaken the conclusion that allocating more takeoff and landing space to commercial airlines will help mitigate delays.

Answer choice C: Over 60 percent of the takeoff and landing slots at the nation's busiest airports are reserved for commercial
airlines. This doesn't weaken the conclusion. If, at the time the airports are dealing with delays, 65% of the runways are allocated to commercial airlines, bumping that number up to, say, 90%, could very well address the problem if the issue is a commercial airline bottleneck. That 60% figure is totally arbitrary. But if the issue is bad weather (answer choice A) no amount of increased runway space is going to do anything to get people in the air any faster.
Here goes my doubt - Over 60 percent could also mean say, 92% of the runways are allocated to commercial airlines. Right ?

So, in that case bumping that number up to, say, 97%, would NOT likely address the problem if the issue is a commercial airline bottleneck. Thus the CONCLUSION is WEAKENED.

Bottom-line: are we discarding the Option C because in one hand it seems to STRENGTHEN the CONCLUSION, on the other hand it seems to WEAKEN the CONCLUSION.

Exactly. Anytime you have a weaken question (or a strengthen question, for that matter), an answer choice that is so open-ended that it could either weaken or strengthen the conclusion can't possibly be correct.

Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course

Like this post

RBBmba@2014: Legendary Member; Posts: 944; Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 8:21 amFollowed by: 5 members; Thanked: 8 times

by RBBmba@2014 » Wed May 11, 2016 10:01 am

In GMAT CR, if we've phrases such as Over 60 percent, then should we consider BOTH the higher and lower-end ranges ALWAYS ?
I mean, should we consider BOTH say,65% and 97% every time in order to choose the OA (as we did in the above case to analyse Answer choice C)?

Like this post

DavidG@VeritasPrep: Legendary Member; Posts: 2663; Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 8:25 amFollowed by: 128 members; Location: Boston, MA; Thanked: 1153 times; GMAT Score:770

by DavidG@VeritasPrep » Wed May 11, 2016 11:48 am

RBBmba@2014 wrote:In GMAT CR, if we've phrases such as Over 60 percent, then should we consider BOTH the higher and lower-end ranges ALWAYS ?
I mean, should we consider BOTH say,65% and 97% every time in order to choose the OA (as we did in the above case to analyse Answer choice C)?

Generally speaking, I think that's a reasonable practice, though it isn't hard to come up with a hypothetical in which such thinking wouldn't be necessary. (Say the conclusion were something like, at least 80% of the population in Community x will purchase product y. If we wanted to weaken this conclusion, an answer choice that stipulated over 25% of the population in Community x has been diagnosed with a fatal allergy to product y, wouldn't require this type of analysis, because if 26% of the population won't consider purchasing the product, we already know that the conclusion is demonstrably weakened, as only 74% of the population can use product y without the risk of death! No reason to then consider the possibility that 97% of the population has the allergy, though the conclusion is obviously weakened in this case as well.)

Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

Veritas Prep Reviews
Save $100 off any live Veritas Prep GMAT Course

Like this post

RBBmba@2014: Legendary Member; Posts: 944; Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 8:21 amFollowed by: 5 members; Thanked: 8 times

by RBBmba@2014 » Wed May 11, 2016 10:37 pm

@Dave - Offhand, do you've have any Official example(s) representing the LOGIC you mentioned above ?

Like this post

Post new topic Post Reply

• Page 1 of 1

GMAT Course Reviews

560 reviews

1168 reviews

431 reviews

359 reviews

147 reviews

5/5

5 Star (560 Reviews)

"Target Test Prep is the closest to the official version of the GMAT exam, about 99% accuracy in terms of the quality and quantity of information. The course has excellently created singular sets of focused lessons and tests for every possible topic that one could come across in the official GMAT exam."

"The TTP course maximizes the efficiency of the time you spend studying. It will take time and effort but I could almost guarantee that if you complete the course exactly as it is laid out you will get an amazing score. They also have a very responsive team willing to help with any questions you might have."

"TTP has two things that I think no other test prep company offers: A teaching approach that reinforces understanding and an attitude that will give you the mental preparedness needed to succeed on the test. TTP gives you a deep understanding of the concept you need to know while teaching you how to think."

Write a Review