Good question. A was the trap answer and I fell for it and chose A.
The explanations above are really good. I can now see that B fits the answer. It is given straight away in the first line " because of the substantial increase in the number of flights operated by the airlines".
Since the access seats restricting the exit should be removed has already been suggested in the passage, choice B helps improve the prospects of avoiding the accidents by preventing a further increase in flights.
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Reduce fatalities in Airline Collisions
-
sathishkumarjva9888
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:11 pm
- Thanked: 1 times
-
geezer0305
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Fri May 11, 2012 9:41 am
- Thanked: 1 times
ov25 wrote:The number of aircraft collisions on the ground is increasing because of the substantial increase in the number of flights operated by the airlines. Many of the fatalities that occur in such collisions are caused not by the collision itself, but by an inherent flaw in the cabin design of most aircraft, in which seats, by restricting access to emergency exits, impede escape. Therefore, to reduce the total number of fatalities that result annually from such collisions, the airlines should be required to remove all seats that restrict access to emergency exits.
Which one of the following proposals, if implemented together with the proposal made in the passage, would improve the prospects for achieving the stated objective of reducing fatalities?
(A) The airlines should be required, when buying new planes, to buy only planes with unrestricted access to emergency exits.
(B) The airlines should not be permitted to increase further the number of flights in order to offset the decrease in the number of seats on each aircraft.
(C) Airport authorities should be required to streamline their passenger check-in procedures to accommodate the increased number of passengers served by the airlines.
(D) Airport authorities should be required to refine security precautions by making them less conspicuous without making them less effective.
(E) The airlines should not be allowed to increase the ticket price for each passenger to offset the decrease in the number of seats on each aircraft.
The answer is A
A is NOT a repeat of what has already been stated in the stimulus.
The stimulus implies that the airlines should remove extra seats from "existing" aircrafts
In order that the proposal is more effective, the airlines should be required to buy new aircrafts without the seats that jeopardize safety....
Hope this helps.....
The argument is:
1) An increase in flights lead to more collisions [Flights >> collisions]
2) When there is a collision, inherent flaw leads to MOST fatalities [Flaw>>Fatalities | collision]
So Fatalities= f(collisions, flaw). So collisions and flaws are the two major variables that impact fatalities. The biggest caveat you missed is that the passages states many (so not all) fatalities are caused by seat flaws. By only focusing on seat flaw and not total collisions that plan to reduce fatalities may not work due to an increase in collisions and thus non flaw related fatalities
1) An increase in flights lead to more collisions [Flights >> collisions]
2) When there is a collision, inherent flaw leads to MOST fatalities [Flaw>>Fatalities | collision]
So Fatalities= f(collisions, flaw). So collisions and flaws are the two major variables that impact fatalities. The biggest caveat you missed is that the passages states many (so not all) fatalities are caused by seat flaws. By only focusing on seat flaw and not total collisions that plan to reduce fatalities may not work due to an increase in collisions and thus non flaw related fatalities
Amit@EconomistGMAT wrote:Interesting question, as it is actually an Argument Flaw or Assumption question in disguise. We are asked to locate the flaw in the argument's plan and solve it with one of the suggested plans.
However, it is more likely that the answer is A. The problem with B is that it is designed to prevent the number of flights from rising and thereby prevent the number of collisions from rising. However, we are explicitly told that the goal is reducing fatalities, and that fatalities are caused not by collisions, but by the design flaw. Answer choice A completes the partial coverage against the design flaw that is suggested by the argument, and is therefore the correct one.
