Paint on a new airliner is usually applied in two stages: first, a coa

Hi,

In this questions you want to strengthen the idea that the new coating will be beneficial financially in the long run even though it is much more expensive initially. So the answer will provide some financial benefit that could outweigh the initial extra cost.

Paint on a new airliner is usually applied in two stages: first, a coat of primer, and then a top coat. A new process requires no primer, but instead uses two layers of the same newly developed coating, with each layer of the new coating having the same thickness and weight as a traditional top coat. Using the new process instead of the old process increases the price of a new aircraft considerably.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly indicates that it is in an airline's long-term economic interest to purchase new airliners painted using the new process rather than the old process?

(A) Although most new airliners are still painted using the old process, aircraft manufacturers now offer a purchaser of any new airliner the option of having it painted using the new process instead.
No financial benefit
(B) A layer of primer on an airliner weighs more than a layer of the new coating would by an amount large enough to make a difference to that airliner's load-bearing capacity.
The plane will be able to carry more with the new coating and therefore make more money per flight. CORRECT
(C) A single layer of the new coating provides the aluminum skin of the airliner with less protection against corrosion than does a layer of primer of the usual thickness.
This only addresses a single layer. There will be two layers. So this is irrelevant.
(D) Unlike the old process, the new process was originally invented for use on spacecraft, which are subject to extremes of temperature to which airliners are never exposed.
Nothing about financial benefits
(E) Because the new coating has a viscosity similar to that of a traditional top coat, aircraft manufacturers can apply it using the same equipment as is used for a traditional top coat.
This is saying that you won't have to buy new equipment to put on the coating BUT it does not address any new financial benefit to offset the costs.

Let me know if you need more advice on this questions. Happy Studies.

HG.

Hi fozzzy,

This is "Evaluate a Plan" type question. The keywords in the question is "long term" and "economic interest", so the correct answer choice will provide a strong economic incentive for the airliner to use the new painting process.

Stimulus says that the new process increases the price of the new aircraft considerably. So, there should be something that could offset this price and increase the revenue in long term.

(A) Although most new airliners are still painted using the old process, aircraft manufacturers now offer a purchaser of any new airliner the option of having it painted using the new process instead.

The aircraft manufacturer offers an option, but this will not offset the price of new painting process.

(B) A layer of primer on an airliner weighs more than a layer of the new coating would by an amount large enough to make a difference to that airliner's load-bearing capacity.

The key here is "load-bearing capacity". If the airliner's load-baring capacity increases then it can carry more luggage/ passengers etc, this in turn would generate greater revenue for the airliner. This choice most strongly indicates that switching to the aircraft with the new paint will be in the long-term economic interest for the airliner
(C) A single layer of the new coating provides the aluminum skin of the airliner with less protection against corrosion than does a layer of primer of the usual thickness.

This choice discusses about a "single layer" but the new process will include "two layers" of coating. So, this choice is will not help us determine whether the new painting process will be in the economic interest of the airline.

(D) Unlike the old process, the new process was originally invented for use on spacecraft, which are subject to extremes of temperature to which airliners are never exposed.

The stimulus discusses aircraft; the performance of new painting process on spacecraft makes a wrong comparison. It could be possible that the aircraft will never face extreme temperature.

(E) Because the new coating has a viscosity similar to that of a traditional top coat, aircraft manufacturers can apply it using the same equipment as is used for a traditional top coat.

Even if the aircraft manufacturers are using the same equipment, it doesn't mean that they will sell the aircraft cheap enough so that the airline can have an economic advantage.

Hope that helps,

Vercules

Do you have any tips on how to tackle Evaluate a plan question stems effectively?

Hi,

e-GMAT had recently written an article on the approach to handle Evaluate questions. You may find it useful. Here's the link:

a-primer-on-variance-analysis-147036.html#p1180642

Thanks,
Chiranjeev

Well, if I were to buy airlines, there must be a good reason to buy the new ones despite being expensive than the older airlines.

(A) Although most new airliners are still painted using the old process, aircraft manufacturers now offer a purchaser of any new airliner the option of having it painted using the new process instead.I am interested in the reason for buying new airlines and not having the option.
(B) A layer of primer on an airliner weighs more than a layer of the new coating would by an amount large enough to make a difference to that airliner's load-bearing capacity. Sounds convincing
(C) A single layer of the new coating provides the aluminum skin of the airliner with less protection against corrosion than does a layer of primer of the usual thickness. How about two layers? this statement doesn't give this answer.
(D) Unlike the old process, the new process was originally invented for use on spacecraft, which are subject to extremes of temperature to which airliners are never exposed. If airlines are never exposed to extreme temperatures, why do I need new airlines then?
(E) Because the new coating has a viscosity similar to that of a traditional top coat, aircraft manufacturers can apply it using the same equipment as is used for a traditional top coat. Even if I use the same equipment, the total cost will increase. In the presence of 'B' this option sounds less convincing

Airline Paints -
usual process - 1st coat of primer and then a top coat.
new process - double coating of the same .
Using the new process increases the price of an aircraft.

why should the companies prefer the new coat rather than old coat??
Reasons could be-

It protects the aircraft better than the old one.
It does not have any recurring cost or something.

Lets check the OA -

(A) Although most new airliners are still painted using the old process, aircraft manufacturers now offer a purchaser of any new airliner the option of having it painted using the new process instead.
wow , Free paint. But , not a reason

(B) A layer of primer on an airliner weighs more than a layer of the new coating would by an amount large enough to make a difference to that airliner's load-bearing capacity.
Airline's load bearing capacity is affected while we paint by a primer ,and the effect is large enough to make difference.- Option is shouting out loud that I am the reason

(C) A single layer of the new coating provides the aluminum skin of the airliner with less protection against corrosion than does a layer of primer of the usual thickness.
Nope , It gives the reason to choose Primer over new coat rather than vice-versa.

(D) Unlike the old process, the new process was originally invented for use on spacecraft, which are subject to extremes of temperature to which airliners are never exposed.
Why the new coat invented , who cares ? Do you ?

(E) Because the new coating has a viscosity similar to that of a traditional top coat, aircraft manufacturers can apply it using the same equipment as is used for a traditional top coat.
Just because it can be used with the same Paint brush to paint . Are you kidding ?

If the load bearing capacity increases because of the new paint, it would be possible to carry more passengers (or cargo), thereby generating more revenue from the same flight. Therefore selecting the new paint may have long-term economic benefit. Thus option B is correct.

Below's my thinking process.

1. Identify the question :
Find the discrepancy. This question is a little bit tricky because the conclusion is in the question. The conclusion in the passage is "new method will cost more" and question elaborate the argument further and asks why new method is more beneficial in long term than old method, even though it cost more than old one.
So the discrepancy here is that new method is beneficial even though it costs more in the first place, find the reason.

2. Identify the main argument :
New method increases cost, meaning it has more benefit than old method, because it only requires one kind of coat -> assuming that this coat is better somehow than the another coat which were used in old process.
Again further in question, new method is more beneficial in long run, even though initial cost is higher than the old method.

3. Eliminate the answer choices
A is already based on an assumption that new method is preferable to purchasers, without reasoning. Moreover it is not mentioning about cost or the benefit of new method, talking about something out of the argument.
B looks good because it is saying new one is lighter than old one, therefore it would increase the airliner's load-bearing capacity. If load-bearing capacity is increased, then the amount of people or things they can carry in each flight would increase with same weight (= same amount of engine = same cost), meaning the benefit from each flight would increase. Thus covering the initial cost in a long run. Correct answer
C is weakening the argument.
D is saying that new one is stronger than old one, but it seems to be making faulty analogy with space craft and airplane. It is said new method is durable to "extremes of temperature to which airliners are never exposed." that means airplane doesn't need the durability of high temperature, as space craft does.
E is also weakening and supporting old method. The choice have to answer why new one is good RATHER than old ones. If old one is good for purchasers then new one isn't better than old one.

gmat1393 GMATNinjaTwo nightblade354 generis VeritasKarishma

W.r.t. solutions provided by sayantanc2k and AtlanticGMAT in the option B, we are only given that
the layer of primer will cause DIFFERENCE in load bearing capacity of airline. How it is safe to assume that
the bearing capacity will ONLY be INCREASED and not DECREASED as suggested by above members?

adkikani , interesting catch, but you have taken "difference" out of context.

It's not just a safe choice to assume that the load bearing capacity must be increased. Increase in load-bearing capacity is the only choice.

It's not the layer of Old Primer that "makes the difference."

The switch from heavier Old Primer to the lighter New Coating makes the difference. And "switch to lighter" can ONLY be an increase in capacity to carry weight of the plane with the lighter layer.

The plane with lighter New Coating Layer carries less layer weight. Now it can carry more OTHER weight.

Let's say that I can carry 100 pounds. My backpack weighs 30 pounds. So I can put 70 pounds in my backpack.

Some wise person gives me a 10 pound backpack made of lighter but strong material. Now I can put 90 pounds in my backpack.

I just increased my load-bearing capacity by 20 pounds. I can put 20 more pounds of "stuff" in my backpack.

Similarly, if a paint layer weighs less, a plane's capacity to carry weight other than the paint layer can ONLY increase.

The plane can now carry extra luggage, for example, at a charge.

Let Old Primer = 20 pounds. Plane #1 has Old Primer put on.

Let New Coating = 10 pounds. Plane #2 has New Coating put on.

Plane #2 with New Coating can carry 10 pounds more OTHER weight than Plane #1 with Old Primer -- every trip.

Say, too, that the airline charges $50 for 10 pounds' of luggage. Plane #2 can charge $50 for that 10 pounds of luggage that it can now carry because its New Coating Layer freed up 10 pounds.

Every time that the Plane #2 flies, it earns $50 more than Plane #1 earns for the same trip.

As soon as Plane #2 covers its New Coating costs, many times per day it earns $50 that Plane #1 does not earn. Now we have an economic benefit: spend more up front to earn a lot more over time.

If we decrease the weight of the layer, we increase the amount of other stuff the plane can carry. We increase the plane's load bearing capacity.

Now the question becomes: is the increase significant? Is the extra amount that the plane can carry enough to make an economic impact?

(B) says yes. The New Coating is lighter than the Old Primer

by an amount large enough to make a difference in plane's load-bearing capacity.

The plane can carry other stuff, for which it can charge. Or, if the plane does not fill that extra capacity with stuff, the plane saves on fuel costs.

I am trying to figure out what you might be thinking. Space to carry? Foul. Importing facts not in evidence.

If I have not cleared up your doubt, see whether you can explain how the "difference" might be a decrease in load-bearing capacity of the plane with the lighter layer.

Hope that helps.

Option (B) clearly mentions that primer weighs more than the new coating. So the contribution of paint in the total load it can carry reduces with the new system. If the total load bearing capacity of the plane structure is 10,000 kg and 1000 kg is used by the paint put on it using the old method, now only 800 kg will be used by the paint using the new method. So the amount of load it can carry in terms of cargo and/or passengers increases with the new system. This could work financially in its favour in the future.

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.