Recently, a plane crashed near the outskirts of Berlin within minutes

boil down to B and D.
B just reiterates what is said in the argument.

Recently, a plane crashed near the outskirts of Berlin within minutes after its takeoff from Berlin airport. Initial analysis confirmed that the crash was caused by either the usage of substandard fuel or a fault in the control board. Since the airport staff tested the control board before the plane took off, analysts hypothesize that the reason behind the plane crash was substandard fuel.

Which of the following options, if true, most strengthens the analysts’ hypothesis?

A. The black box, upon inspection, was found to belong to a generation of models more compatible with fighter planes than with passenger planes. -This provides and alternate explanation for the crash. WEAKENER.
B. Upon enquiry, the staff at Berlin airport confirmed that they indeed checked the control board before the plane took off. -Asking a criminal whether he committed the crime or not won't get you a correct answer. INCORRECT.
C. Using a low quality fuel can lead to engine failure and a subsequent plane crash. -We already know this from the argument that engine failure causes plane crash. INCORRECT.
D. All the testing conducted by the airport staff is done very extensively to avoid any lapses. -This removes any alternative explanation for the crash. CORRECT.
E. The plane belongs to the ZX3V series which contains a fuel combustion engine that is notoriously famous for explosions within minutes after takeoff. -This provides and alternate explanation for the crash. WEAKENER.

hard but typical question

avoid reiterated statement.

A very good question .
Imo D

A is just outside the scope of the argument .
B Is just restatement of one of the premise of the argument .
C Well this may be true but we do know weather it was used in the plane .
D Correct if in fact this is the case then we have reasons that the crash was caused by the substandard fuel .
E Again this out of scope.

Recently, a plane crashed near the outskirts of Berlin within minutes after its takeoff from Berlin airport. Initial analysis confirmed that the crash was caused by either the usage of substandard fuel or a fault in the control board. Since the airport staff tested the control board before the plane took off, analysts hypothesize that the reason behind the plane crash was substandard fuel.

Which of the following options, if true, most strengthens the analysts’ hypothesis?

Premise :
1) Plane crashed minutes after its takeoff.
2) The crash might be because of fault in control Board
3) tested the control board before the plane took off.

analysts’ hypothesis:- the reason behind the plane crash was substandard fuel.


Pre-thinking:
Any option that provide us information about
1) impact of using substandard fuel will strengthen the Conclusion or
2) No fault in Control board tested before plane took off will strengthen the Conclusion

A. The black box, upon inspection, was found to belong to a generation of models more compatible with fighter planes than with passenger planes.
New Info - Black box was never discussed in the passage. So we can't say if it will strengthen or weaken the argument

B. Upon enquiry, the staff at Berlin airport confirmed that they indeed checked the control board before the plane took off.
This is just repeat of statement given in premise. We need some new info.

C. Using a low quality fuel can lead to engine failure and a subsequent plane crash.
I think this is inline with our Pre-thinking. Hold on to it.

D. All the testing conducted by the airport staff is done very extensively to avoid any lapses.
It specifies that all the testing conducted would fix the control board issue, if any. This is also inline with our Pre-thinking. Hold on to it.

E. The plane belongs to the ZX3V series which contains a fuel combustion engine that is notoriously famous for explosions within minutes after takeoff.
Well it talks about fuel combustion engine. Nothing about substandard fuel.

C & D both are inline with our pre-thinking. How to eliminate one of these 2 choices?

Please help me understand this!!

My take on options:-

A:- A weakener, since it attributes the mishap to black box.
B:- Same as that in the passage. Has not managed to strengthen the arguments in the passage at all.
C:- Question is not whether it can but whether it did?
D:- The passage stated that inspection was conducted. This states that the inspection was very thorough and added qualitative element to the inspection. Therefore, correct option.
E:- Such explosions may take place with good/normal quality fuel.

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.