In a typical year, Innovair’s airplanes are involved in 35 collisions

The reason has to have something to do with the repair costs associated with the collisions that are expected to still happen. Specifically, the repair costs for those collisions have to be lower than average. Other words, the repair costs for the avoided collisions have to be higher than average. Answer choice C fits the reasoning.

Answer is C

Explaination :-

A) most ground collisions happen when ground crews are rushing to minimize the time a delayed plane spends on the ground.
WRONG :- Irrelevant information. Not connected to the repair cost in any manner.

B) a ground collision typically occurs when there are no passengers on the airplane.
WRONG:- Irelevaant to the argument at hand. No connection to reduce damage repair cost or training.

C) the additional training will focus on helping ground crews avoid those kinds of ground collisions that cause the most costly damage.
CORRECT:- Total damage because of collision =1 million, Training cost= half million.
Total expense to the company 1 million + half million ( IF THE TRAINING IS USELESS)
But training is helpful and prevents HALF THE NUMBER OF the most expensive damages. The reaming half collision cost only 10K.
Money Lost = half million in training + 10 K ( i.e.:-Money lost to collision)
NET MONEY SAVE = 1million -( Half million + 10 K )= almost half million

D) the $500,000 cost figure for the additional training of ground crews includes the wages that those crews will earn during the time spent in actual training.
WRONG :- Tempting but Incorrect. If someone would say that at least the company is saving money on training by clubbing the salary in training expense. But can the salary of a few crew members be half a million. (Damage - Training cost) NOT LIKELY.

E) most ground collisions have been caused by the least experienced ground-crew members
WRONG :- Agreeable but ultimately incorrect. If the damage in such accident is only 20 K , then there is no logic behind this argument. We are not concerned about who gets the training or who has caused more accidents. What we are concerned with is - TO GIVE TRAINING AND REDUCE DAMAGE REPAIR COST.

GMATNinjaTwo GMATNinja generis VeritasPrepKarishma

Is below approach correct?
(Simplifying nos in Q stem)
Innovair: I
Say I spend $5 in training ground crews whereas the repair cost is $10
(for 35 planes), then D is a bit out of scope then even if we know that the
training costs includes wages earned by ground crew during training, we can
not establish any relationship with whether repairs will come down more exponnently
as Q asks us to.

adkikani, I think you are on the right track here...

The collisions cost Innovair $1,000,000 per year. If all collisions cost about the same, then cutting collisions in half should cut the cost in half (bringing it down to about $500,000).

The new training is going to cost $500,000 and, at best, it is going to cut collisions in half. If all collisions cost about the same, then that new training will only save $500,000 AT BEST. So why would we spend $500,000 on training if it will only save us $500,000 or less? At best, we'll break even, and we might even lose money!

As for choice (D), even though the wages are part of that $500,000 training expense, we'll have the same problem if the training is only going to save us $500,000 or less.

But what if all collisions are not created equal? In other words, what if some kinds of collisions are more costly than others? In that case, if we can eliminate most of THOSE kinds of costly collisions, then cutting collisions by half might save substantially more than $500,000.

If Innovair focuses its training on avoiding those kinds of costly collisions, they can expect to save substantially more than $500,000. So choice (C) is correct.

Correct answer should mention repair costs will decline after training.

(A) most ground collisions happen when ground crews are rushing to minimize the time a delayed airplane spends on the ground Irrelevant

(B) a ground collision typically occurs when there are no passengers on the airplane . Irrelevant

(C) the additional training will focus on helping ground crews avoid those kinds of ground collisions that cause the most costly damage

(D) the $500,000 cost figure for the additional training of ground crews includes the wages that those crews will earn during the time spent in actual training Out of scope

(E) most ground collisions have been caused by the least experienced ground-crew members[/quote] Irrelevant

(C)

Well well well

C is quite clearly the answer as when most costly damages will be avoided, the repair would only be of less costly things and hence cost less.

To those who picked E, I believe it is compelling, however, least experienced members will still be there no???? Relatively weak, no less... So accidents will still be caused by them.

This question is very straight if understood correctly as we read it.
First, most important part, the cost of repair is not a linear function either positively or negatively. Consider a real world scenario where if someone damages his/her car in an accident the cost of repair differs every time. Similarly, here as well cost of repair might be high for crucial parts such as engines etc. and less for parts such as a sensor on the wings.

Also, to understand it better, let's say the minor damages occur frequently increasing the number of accidents. But damages to crucial parts are rare, however, more costly whenever they happen, increasing the cost of repair(impact of cost incurred is more relative to minor damages).

To sum up, the question has a weighted average concept applicable to it. Thus, C is the correct answer.

Hope this is helpful..!

Why is D incorrect?

Understanding the Passage

In a typical year, Innovair's airplanes are involved in 35 collisions while parked or being towed in airports, with a resulting yearly cost of $1,000,000 for repairs.
• Generally, in a year, Innovair, an airline company, is involved in 35 airplane ground collisions.
• These collisions are caused while the planes are being parked or being towed in the airports.
• The yearly cost for repairing the damaged planes is $1,000,000.
Inference: The planes do not have any passengers when the ground collisions take place.

To reduce the frequency of ground collisions, Innovair will begin giving its ground crews additional training, at an annual cost of $500,000.
• Innovair wants to reduce the number of ground collisions in a year.
• To reduce the number of collisions, Innovair is going to provide extra training to its ground crew.
• The cost of the extra training will be $500,000 yearly.
Although this will cut the number of ground collisions by about half at best, the drop in repair costs can be expected to be much greater, since
• The expected result of the training is to reduce the number of ground collisions by half its current number (reduce by 50% maximum) at max.
• But the reduction in the repair cost will go down by more than 50%.
Conclusion: The drop in the repair cost is expected to be greater than the drop in the number of ground collisions after the ground crews are given additional training.
Pre-thinking

Strengthen Framework
What information will help us believe more in the conclusion?
Conclusion: The drop in the repair cost is expected to be greater than the drop in the number of ground collisions after the ground crews are given additional training.
Given that:
(i) Innovair’s airplanes are involved in 35 collisions at the time of being parked or towed in airports, in a year.
(ii) The annual repair cost for these collisions is $1,000,000.
(iii) Additional training will be provided to the ground crew to curb ground collisions at the cost of $500,000.
(iv) The number of ground collisions is expected to be reduced by half the current number – at max.
Though Process
Problem – 35 airplane ground collisions annually.
Solution – Additional training worth $500,000 to be given to the ground staff.
Goal – Reduce the number of ground collisions.
Outcome –
1. The maximum reduction in ground collisions is expected to be half the current number.
2. Greater reduction in repair costs.
The repair costs are expected to be reduced even when the total number of ground collision is not reduced by more than half the current number.
The repairing cost for most collisions is very high.
Strengthener
A statement that indicates that the additional training given to the ground staff will help avoid ground collisions that require a significantly high repair cost.
Such a statement would strengthen the author’s conclusion that the repair costs will be reduced by a huge amount even if the number of collisions isn’t reduced by more than half their current numbers.
Answer Choice Analysis
(A) most ground collisions happen when ground crews are rushing to minimize the time a delayed airplane spends on the ground
• This option provides additional information on when and how the ground collisions take place. This is irrelevant to the conclusion that the number of ground collisions will go down by half, but the costs of repair will go down by much more. Thus, this is not the correct choice.


(B) a ground collision typically occurs when there are no passengers on the airplane
• This statement can be inferred from the passage. There is no new information that is presented by this option choice. Thus, this is not the correct choice.


(C) the additional training will focus on helping ground crews avoid those kinds of ground collisions that cause the most costly damage CORRECT
• This statement is directly in line with our pre-thinking strengthener. Therefore, this is the correct answer choice.


(D) the $500,000 cost figure for the additional training of ground crews includes the wages that those crews will earn during the time spent in actual training
• This option talks specifically about the training cost, whereas the conclusion is about the impact of the training on the repair costs. Thus, this is not the correct choice.


(E) most ground collisions have been caused by the least experienced ground-crew members
• Although this statement brings new information, this new information is irrelevant to the author’s conclusion. The author is not concerned with who caused most of the ground collisions because, according to the passage, all the ground crew will be provided additional training. Thus, this is not the correct choice.

Conclusion: the drop in repair costs can be expected to be much greater

(A) most ground collisions happen when ground crews are rushing to minimize the time a delayed airplane spends on the ground
Originally, I picked this, but it’s not focused on the repair costs. This is focused on potential costs/lost $. If ground collisions -> repair costs & further delay airplanes on ground -> less turnover, which means less money because lower number of people paying for flights. But again, this isn’t focused on REPAIR costs, as the conclusion explicitly states

(B) a ground collision typically occurs when there are no passengers on the airplane
Out of scope - why are repair costs expected to be much higher

(C) the additional training will focus on helping ground crews avoid those kinds of ground collisions that cause the most costly damage
This provides reasoning as to why although collisions reduce by half at best but also drop in repair costs can be expected to much greater. Training = focus on the collisions that are the MOST damaging. They don’t focus on ALL the collisions (hence only half at most are reduced) but rather the ones that are the most damaging, which would account for the greater drop in repair costs

(D) the $500,000 cost figure for the additional training of ground crews includes the wages that those crews will earn during the time spent in actual training
Out of scope – we don’t know remotely how many employees there are and how much money they each make. How do you know it’s over 500k

(E) most ground collisions have been caused by the least experienced ground-crew members
Out of scope – we don’t care WHO causes the damage in the first place. The argument is that it already happened and that the number of collisions will only reduce by half at best.

The fundamental question that we must answer is why can the repair costs be expected to be greater than less than $500k on an annual basis?

In a typical year, Innovair’s airplanes are involved in 35 collisions while parked or being towed in airports, with a resulting yearly cost of $1,000,000 for repairs.

To reduce the frequency of ground collisions, Innovair will begin giving its ground crews additional training, at an annual cost of $500,000. Although this will cut the number of ground collisions by about half at best, the drop in repair costs can be expected to be much greater, since __________.

(A) most ground collisions happen when ground crews are rushing to minimize the time a delayed airplane spends on the ground X
-descriptive and related to the passage, but does not answer the question

(B) a ground collision typically occurs when there are no passengers on the airplane X
-descriptive and related to the passage, but does not answer the question

(C) the additional training will focus on helping ground crews avoid those kinds of ground collisions that cause the most costly damage Correct
Correct, with training we can expect that the most costly collisions will be avoided.

(D) the $500,000 cost figure for the additional training of ground crews includes the wages that those crews will earn during the time spent in actual training X
-descriptive and related to the passage, but does not answer the question

(E) most ground collisions have been caused by the least experienced ground-crew members X
-past-oriented, not future-oriented

Below is my thought process in eliminating options:
Kept A on hold(was a bit conservative)

B: A mere fact. That would be the case pre-training when $1 million was lost and also post training. Doesn't explain why drop in repair costs would be there. Reject B

C: States that not all collision are created financially equally. Interesting. Seems like the answer. Put it on hold

D: Not interested whether InnovAir has made a financially prudent decision. We are interested whether an option explains why drop in repair costs would be there. Reject D

E: kept it on hold initially

Comparing A C and E, C seemed like the best answer so chose that

premise: Innovair’s airplanes are involved in 35 ground collisions- $1,000,000 repairs
premise: training additionally its ground crews to reduce the frequency of ground collisions
-cost of $500,000
-cut the number of ground collisions by about half at best
conclusion: drop-in repair costs can be expected to be much greater
A) irrelevant, minimize delay time is not relevant with repair costs and collision number half cut
B) the same as A)
C) build a relationship between collision half decrease and repair costs greater decrease, most costly damage avoid by training.
D) the same as A), the composition has nothing with repair costs and collision number
E) the same as A)

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.