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

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE AWARDS 2026

Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.

GMATLiveTeach Starts Oct 17
Chris Peckover, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Chris Peckover, 100th-Percentile GMAT Scorer

Oct 17 · Chris Peckover
Sat · 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM ET
Oct 20 · Chris Peckover
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Oct 25 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 1:00 to 4:00 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemand 5 seats left Start anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

X-387

Expert replies
by maihuna » Sat Aug 22, 2009 12:50 pm
Airplane manufacturer: I object to your characterization of our X-387 jets as dangerous. No X-387 in commercial use has ever crashed or even had a serious malfunction.
Airline regulator: The problem with the X-387 is not that it, itself, malfunctions, but that it creates turbulence in its wake that can create hazardous conditions for aircraft in its vicinity.

The airline regulator responds to the manufacturer by doing which of the following?

(A) Characterizing the manufacturer's assertion as stemming from subjective interest rather than from objective evaluation of the facts

(B) Drawing attention to the fact that the manufacturer's interpretation of the word "dangerous" is too narrow

(C) Invoking evidence that the manufacturer has explicitly dismissed as irrelevant to the point at issue

(D) Citing statistical evidence that refutes the manufacturer's claim

(E) Casting doubt on the extent of the manufacturer's knowledge of the number of recent airline disasters
Charged up again to beat the beast :)
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by niraj_a » Sat Aug 22, 2009 1:01 pm
B for me, by POE.

D was a close one for me, but i interpreted statistical evidence to mean say the # of X planes that crashed. C is wrong because the manufacturer never directly revokes the regulator's premises.
Join the discussion

by pandeyvineet24 » Sat Aug 22, 2009 3:43 pm
I would go for A.
Join the discussion

by vikram_k51 » Sat Aug 22, 2009 11:11 pm
Will go with B.
Join the discussion

Re: X-387

by gmatmachoman » Sun Aug 23, 2009 7:35 am
maihuna wrote:Airplane manufacturer: I object to your characterization of our X-387 jets as dangerous. No X-387 in commercial use has ever crashed or even had a serious malfunction.
Airline regulator: The problem with the X-387 is not that it, itself, malfunctions, but that it creates turbulence in its wake that can create hazardous conditions for aircraft in its vicinity.

The airline regulator responds to the manufacturer by doing which of the following?

(A) Characterizing the manufacturer's assertion as stemming from subjective interest rather than from objective evaluation of the facts

(B) Drawing attention to the fact that the manufacturer's interpretation of the word "dangerous" is too narrow

(C) Invoking evidence that the manufacturer has explicitly dismissed as irrelevant to the point at issue

(D) Citing statistical evidence that refutes the manufacturer's claim

(E) Casting doubt on the extent of the manufacturer's knowledge of the number of recent airline disasters
IMO B

Explanation: "X-387 jets is dangerous or not" is discussed by the regulator & manufacturer by citing various evidences.
Since becox the manufacture misunderstood the magnitude of the term "dangerous and confined only to his aircraft,I go with B that serves the issue..

Comments maihuna!!!

Initially C was a eyecatcher..But finely disentangled it...
Join the discussion

by mehravikas » Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:45 pm
I would go for - D
Join the discussion

by maihuna » Tue Dec 29, 2009 10:59 am
gmatmachoman wrote:
maihuna wrote:Airplane manufacturer: I object to your characterization of our X-387 jets as dangerous. No X-387 in commercial use has ever crashed or even had a serious malfunction.
Airline regulator: The problem with the X-387 is not that it, itself, malfunctions, but that it creates turbulence in its wake that can create hazardous conditions for aircraft in its vicinity.

The airline regulator responds to the manufacturer by doing which of the following?

(A) Characterizing the manufacturer's assertion as stemming from subjective interest rather than from objective evaluation of the facts

(B) Drawing attention to the fact that the manufacturer's interpretation of the word "dangerous" is too narrow

(C) Invoking evidence that the manufacturer has explicitly dismissed as irrelevant to the point at issue

(D) Citing statistical evidence that refutes the manufacturer's claim

(E) Casting doubt on the extent of the manufacturer's knowledge of the number of recent airline disasters
IMO B

Explanation: "X-387 jets is dangerous or not" is discussed by the regulator & manufacturer by citing various evidences.
Since becox the manufacture misunderstood the magnitude of the term "dangerous and confined only to his aircraft,I go with B that serves the issue..

Comments maihuna!!!

Initially C was a eyecatcher..But finely disentangled it...
Ohh sorry for being so late, B it is. Since Manufactures have not dismissed anything explicitly or implicitly it is not supported. Nothing like casting doubt too so E is also out, agreed B has some extremeness.
Charged up again to beat the beast :)
Join the discussion

by mehravikas » Tue Dec 29, 2009 2:27 pm
@maihuna - you mean OA is B?
Join the discussion

by maihuna » Tue Dec 29, 2009 9:41 pm
mehravikas wrote:@maihuna - you mean OA is B?
Yeah OA is B
Charged up again to beat the beast :)
Join the discussion

by gmatmachoman » Tue Dec 29, 2009 10:40 pm
Hi Nagendra...

That was very nice to c OA !!
Join the discussion

by Testluv » Thu Dec 31, 2009 4:26 am
gmatmachoman wrote:Hi Nagendra...

That was very nice to c OA !!
You're too funny Gov ;)
Kaplan Teacher in Toronto
Join the discussion

by jainrahul1985 » Sat Oct 09, 2010 8:33 am
can someone please explain what's wrong with option C . I understand the problem is not with the plans but the problem caused by planes .
Join the discussion

by hcueva » Wed Oct 13, 2010 11:43 am
jainrahul1985 wrote:can someone please explain what's wrong with option C . I understand the problem is not with the plans but the problem caused by planes .
I think the problem with C) is that the manufacturer didn't EXPLICITELY dismissed the evidence as irrelevant; he may have just missed it.
Join the discussion

by vinodsundaram » Fri Jul 20, 2012 5:01 am
C,D,E can be eliminated. Out of Scope

A&B are close
A talks about the objective evaluation of facts. No fact is mentioned by regulator. Just that hazardous conditions in the vicinity.

By POE, B
Join the discussion