Airport official:Local residents have been complaining that night fights into Plainsville airport disturb their sleep and should be sharply reduced in number.This complaint is completely unreasonable--there have been night flights coming into the airport from the very beginning,twenty years ago,and these residents should have taken that fact into account when buying their homes.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the airport argument depends?
A There are fewer night flights now than there were originally
B The residents who are complaining have been in their current homes fewer than twenty years
C The residents who are complaining are ignoring the benefits they gain from he presence of the airport
D The economic success of the airport depends entirely on the existence of the night flights
E People buying houses in Plainville all avoid buying houses near the airport if they can
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Question Pack 1 CR Q#3
This topic has expert replies
-
richachampion
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 698
- Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2015 12:12 am
- Location: Noida, India
- Thanked: 32 times
- Followed by:26 members
- GMAT Score:740
R I C H A,
My GMAT Journey: 470 → 720 → 740
Target Score: 760+
[email protected]
1. Press thanks if you like my solution.
2. Contact me if you are not improving. (No Free Lunch!)
My GMAT Journey: 470 → 720 → 740
Target Score: 760+
[email protected]
1. Press thanks if you like my solution.
2. Contact me if you are not improving. (No Free Lunch!)
-
richachampion
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 698
- Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2015 12:12 am
- Location: Noida, India
- Thanked: 32 times
- Followed by:26 members
- GMAT Score:740
OA: B
R I C H A,
My GMAT Journey: 470 → 720 → 740
Target Score: 760+
[email protected]
1. Press thanks if you like my solution.
2. Contact me if you are not improving. (No Free Lunch!)
My GMAT Journey: 470 → 720 → 740
Target Score: 760+
[email protected]
1. Press thanks if you like my solution.
2. Contact me if you are not improving. (No Free Lunch!)
-
crackverbal
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 157
- Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 7:30 pm
- Location: India
- Thanked: 65 times
- Followed by:3 members
The argument states this -
Night flights into the airport 20 yrs ago --> residents should have taken this fact into account while buying homes --> their complaints are unreasonable
Anything that breaks the link would be a flaw in the argument. Negating the flaw would lead to an assumption.
A - incorrect. the number of flights is not relevant to the argument, which states that night flights started 20 yrs ago and hence people should have taken this fact into account before buying their homes.
Also, negating this does not weaken the argument. One negation is this - there are the same number of flights now than there were originally - this does not weaken.
B - correct answer. If they purchased their homes before the night flights started (20 yrs ago) the argument falls apart.
C - Not relevant. the argument has nothing to do with "benefits" and talks only about "night flights", not the airport itself. the argument simply states that the residents should have considered the fact that night flights operate at the airport before purchasing their homes.
D - cannot be inferred. Also, note that "entirely" is a very strong word.
E - weakens the argument. If 'all' of them avoid buying houses, the statement that they should have taken into consideration the fact that night flights operate at Plainville does not hold much merit.
Night flights into the airport 20 yrs ago --> residents should have taken this fact into account while buying homes --> their complaints are unreasonable
Anything that breaks the link would be a flaw in the argument. Negating the flaw would lead to an assumption.
A - incorrect. the number of flights is not relevant to the argument, which states that night flights started 20 yrs ago and hence people should have taken this fact into account before buying their homes.
Also, negating this does not weaken the argument. One negation is this - there are the same number of flights now than there were originally - this does not weaken.
B - correct answer. If they purchased their homes before the night flights started (20 yrs ago) the argument falls apart.
C - Not relevant. the argument has nothing to do with "benefits" and talks only about "night flights", not the airport itself. the argument simply states that the residents should have considered the fact that night flights operate at the airport before purchasing their homes.
D - cannot be inferred. Also, note that "entirely" is a very strong word.
E - weakens the argument. If 'all' of them avoid buying houses, the statement that they should have taken into consideration the fact that night flights operate at Plainville does not hold much merit.
Join Free 4 part MBA Through GMAT Video Training Series here -
https://gmat.crackverbal.com/mba-throug ... video-2018
Enroll for our GMAT Trial Course here -
https://gmatonline.crackverbal.com/
For more info on GMAT and MBA, follow us on @AskCrackVerbal
https://gmat.crackverbal.com/mba-throug ... video-2018
Enroll for our GMAT Trial Course here -
https://gmatonline.crackverbal.com/
For more info on GMAT and MBA, follow us on @AskCrackVerbal
