Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
10 Mar 2018, 10:28
Kudos
Bookmarks
The following appeared as part of an article in a daily newspaper:
“The computerized onboard warning system that will be installed in commercial airliners will virtually solve the problem of
midair plane collisions. One plane’s warning system can receive signals from another’s transponder—a radio set that
signals a plane’s course—in order to determine the likelihood of a collision and recommend evasive action.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
The author of a newspaper article concludes that the computer onboard warning system that will be installed in commercial airliners will solve the problem of midair plane collisions. The author reasons that one plane's warning system will receive the signals from another's transponder and if a collision is likely, the warning system will recommend evasive action. Although the argument seems well reasoned at first glance, it makes few weak assumptions.
Firstly, The author assumes that the commercial airliners are representative of the entire air traffic at a given instance. For Example, The number of commercial aircrafts may be negligible when compared to the number of fighter and cargo planes. In that case, the security measures adopted only for the commercial aircrafts may proveto be ineffective.
Secondly, The author assumes that the recommendations made by the warning system in case of an emergency will be efficiently followed by the pilot in order to avert the collision. There may be a case when a pilot may feel lazy to follow the instructions or he may act according to his instincts. In that case, the likelihood of the collision will not be reduced.
In conclusion, The argument is unconvincing. To strengthen the argument, The author must show that the majority of the air traffic is due to commerical airliners so that if the warning system is adopted by them, it will prove to be effective. Also, The author must show that there is a high likelihood that the pilots will follow the instructions of the warning system.
“The computerized onboard warning system that will be installed in commercial airliners will virtually solve the problem of
midair plane collisions. One plane’s warning system can receive signals from another’s transponder—a radio set that
signals a plane’s course—in order to determine the likelihood of a collision and recommend evasive action.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
The author of a newspaper article concludes that the computer onboard warning system that will be installed in commercial airliners will solve the problem of midair plane collisions. The author reasons that one plane's warning system will receive the signals from another's transponder and if a collision is likely, the warning system will recommend evasive action. Although the argument seems well reasoned at first glance, it makes few weak assumptions.
Firstly, The author assumes that the commercial airliners are representative of the entire air traffic at a given instance. For Example, The number of commercial aircrafts may be negligible when compared to the number of fighter and cargo planes. In that case, the security measures adopted only for the commercial aircrafts may proveto be ineffective.
Secondly, The author assumes that the recommendations made by the warning system in case of an emergency will be efficiently followed by the pilot in order to avert the collision. There may be a case when a pilot may feel lazy to follow the instructions or he may act according to his instincts. In that case, the likelihood of the collision will not be reduced.
In conclusion, The argument is unconvincing. To strengthen the argument, The author must show that the majority of the air traffic is due to commerical airliners so that if the warning system is adopted by them, it will prove to be effective. Also, The author must show that there is a high likelihood that the pilots will follow the instructions of the warning system.
22 Mar 2018, 07:46
Kudos
Bookmarks
The following appeared as part of an article in a daily newspaper:
“The computerized onboard warning system that will be installed in commercial airliners will virtually solve the problem of
midair plane collisions. One plane’s warning system can receive signals from another’s transponder—a radio set that
signals a plane’s course—in order to determine the likelihood of a collision and recommend evasive action.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
i need to spend 10 minutes to brainstorm 2 assumptions.
assumption 1. Midair collision can be solved by this system. collision is caused by bad signal transfer.
assumption 2. pilot are good at using this system. if pilot can not, argument fall apart
“The computerized onboard warning system that will be installed in commercial airliners will virtually solve the problem of
midair plane collisions. One plane’s warning system can receive signals from another’s transponder—a radio set that
signals a plane’s course—in order to determine the likelihood of a collision and recommend evasive action.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
i need to spend 10 minutes to brainstorm 2 assumptions.
assumption 1. Midair collision can be solved by this system. collision is caused by bad signal transfer.
assumption 2. pilot are good at using this system. if pilot can not, argument fall apart
Moderator:
