betterscore wrote:
Only a reduction of 10 percent in the number of scheduled flights using Greentown's airport will allow the delays that are so common there to be avoided. Hevelia airstrip, 40 miles away, would, if upgraded and expanded, be an attractive alternative for fully 20 percent of the passengers using Greentown airport. Nevertheless, experts reject the claim that turning Hevelia into a full-service airport would end the chronic delays at Greentown.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to justify the experts' position?
(A) Turning Hevelia into a full-service airport would require not only substantial construction at the airport itself, but also the construction of new access highways.
(B) A second largely undeveloped airstrip close to Greentown airport would be a more attractive alternative than Hevelia for many passengers who now use Greentown.
(C) Hevelia airstrip lies in a relatively undeveloped area but would, if it became a full-service airport, be a magnet for commercial and residential development.
(D) If an airplane has to wait to land, the extra jet fuel required adds significantly to the airline's costs.
(E) Several airlines use Greentown as a regional hub, so that most flights landing at Greentown have many passengers who then take different flights to reach their final destinations.
ID - CR04366
G 13 – Q22
Greentown Airport
Step 1: Identify the Question
This question stem is challenging. The if true language indicates that the question is one of three types: Strengthen, Weaken, or Explain the Discrepancy.
Step 2: Deconstruct the Argument
G airport: delays common
ONLY fixed by 10% ↓ flights
H airport upgrade → 20% of G pass. find H ‘attractive’
BUT experts: this will not end delays
There are two parts to this argument. The first part describes a particular line of reasoning. If Hevelia airport is upgraded, then 20% of current Greentown passengers will find Hevelia an attractive alternative, and this will presumably reduce delays at Greentown. The second part, however, states that experts reject this claim and believe that the delays will continue, in spite of the evidence in the argument. The experts’ rejection is a surprising phenomenon that needs to be explained. Treat this as an Explain the Discrepancy problem.
Step 3: Pause and State the Goal
The right answer will explain the experts’ surprising belief that the upgrade will fail. In order to do so, it must explain why, even in light of the facts, the Hevelia upgrade won’t reduce delays at Greentown.
Step 4: Work from Wrong to Right
(A) The experts’ claim is that the upgrade won’t reduce flight delays. Construction and new access highways aren’t necessarily connected to flight delays in any way.
(B) The existence of a different potential solution to the problem doesn’t explain why experts believe the current solution will fail.
(C) Whether Hevelia airstrip becomes a magnet for commercial and residential development doesn’t clearly relate to whether it will reduce flight delays at Greentown. It’s possible that the commercial and residential development will make Hevelia even more attractive to Greentown passengers, but in this case, the experts’ position—that developing Hevelia will not reduce delays—would be even stranger.
(D) The experts claim that the upgrade will not reduce flight delays, while this answer choice suggests that reducing flight delays will reduce airline costs. A statement about the effects of reducing flight delays does not justify a claim about the plausibility of reducing flight delays.
(E) CORRECT. Most flights landing at Greentown land there specifically because several airlines use Greentown as a regional hub. Even if Hevelia is upgraded, most flights landing at Greentown won’t be able to switch to landing at Hevelia, unless more changes, not discussed in the argument, are implemented. Therefore, delays at Greentown won’t necessarily decrease. In light of this reasoning, the experts’ skepticism makes sense.
premise: 10 % reduction of scheduled flights using Greentown's airport can avoid common delay
premise: if Hevelia airstrip is upgraded and expanded, it can be an alternate choice of 20% passengers using Greentown airport
experts' conclusion: turning Hevelia into a full-service airport would not end the chronic delays at Greentown
fallacies: incomplete information, the gap between turning Hevelia into a full-service airport and the chronic delays decrease at Greentown, or 20% passengers using Greentown airport swift to Hevelia and 10% reduction of scheduled flights using Greentown's airport
A) out of scope, the cost of upgrading and expanding is irrelevant with delay issue
B) out of scope, another good choice cannot explain why turning Hevelia into a full-service airport would not end the chronic delays at Greentown
C) out of scope, other benefits of turning Hevelia into a full-service airport has no effects on the only focused benefits that the airstrip would end the chronic delays at Greentown
D) out of scope, the bad effects of delay also cannot explain the experts' conclusion.
E) turning Hevelia into a full-service airport would let 20% of passengers using Greentown airport swift to Hevelia, but Greentown is a hub, flights will not decrease by more than 10%, delay cannot be resolved.