Sparrow Airlines is planning to reduce its costs by cleaning its plane

Question

Sparrow Airlines is planning to reduce its costs by cleaning its planes' engines once a month, rather than the industry standard of every six months. With cleaner engines, Sparrow can postpone engine overhauls, which take planes out of service for up to 18 months. Furthermore, cleaning an engine reduces its fuel consumption by roughly 1.2 percent.

The airline's plan assumes that

A. fuel prices are likely to rise in the near future and therefore cutting fuel consumption is an important goal
B. the cost of monthly cleaning of an airplane's engines is not significantly greater in the long run than is the cost of an engine overhaul
C. engine cleaning does not remove an airplane from service
D. Sparrow Airlines has had greater problems with engine overhauls and fuel consumption than other airlines have
E. cleaning engines once a month will give Sparrow Airlines a competitive advantage over other airlines

ID: 500114
CR20531.01
Verbal Review 2020 NEW QUESTION

GMATNinja · Accepted Answer

Even if engine cleaning DOES remove an airplane from service, that wouldn't necessarily hurt the author's argument.

Maybe the airplane can be removed from service at a time when it is not needed (i.e. overnight). Maybe it only takes an hour to clean the engine and removing an airplane from service for a short amount of time doesn't impact the airline's operations. Maybe the airline has a couple extra planes and can thus afford to always have one or two planes out of service.

Regardless of whether engine cleaning removes an airplane from service, cleaning the engines once a month can still reduce costs. (C) is not a  required  assumption.

I hope that helps!

DavidTutorexamPAL · Answer

The argument is that cleaning more frequently will lower costs because it will prevent planes being taken out of commission and will reduce fuel costs.
The natural assumption is that the cleaning will not cost more money than all the savings combined. Weaker assumptions are that the things that are supposed to save money will (a) actually happen and (b) reduce the costs as they are supposed to. As we know what to look for, we can just look for it, without wasting time on irrelevant information. This is a Precise approach.

Going over our answers, (B) is precisely what we expected to find so is our answer.

Render · Answer

But the costs of engine overhauls are still greater, although not significantly, than the costs associated with the monthly cleaning of the engines. Thus, the company does not reduce its costs.

I know that the engine cleaning procedures will also decrease fuel consumption, but if our position is straightforward, we still don't know if that part of engine cleaning costs which exceeds engine overhaul costs can be offset by the reduced consumption of fuel. If it all depends on the word "significant", then everything is clear.

800Dreamer · Answer

same question I want to ask. I choose A, because of "significantly" in B. Even if it is slightly greater then also the plan wont work. I know answer will be B only since it is an OG question but how to think in GMAT direction?

DavidTutorexamPAL · Answer

Hey  Render  and  nkhl.goyal ,

With respect to (A), the company is interested in lowering (current) costs, and therefore whether the (future) fuel costs are higher is not necessary for the argument's logic to hold. (Also, 'therefore... is an important goal' triggers my 'what on earth does this have to do with how the argument is worded' alarm bells).

Note also that if we negate (B) we get 'the cost of monthly cleaning is significantly greater, in the long run, than that of overhauls'. In other words, the only way the company could possibly cut costs is if the savings on delaying the 'out-of-commission' status and on fuel were sufficiently large so as to offset the 'significant' increase in cost caused by the cleaning. I agree we have no actual information on this so cannot know. But the specific use of 'significantly' and 'in the long run' should make you suspect that this is the desired answer. Even more importantly, this is the only option that addresses the logic of the argument in a direct manner. Together this should be enough to convince you to mark it as correct.

dcummins · Answer

The driver of the plan is to reduce costs and the information that hasn't been presented is the difference between increasing the frequency of cleaning and an engine overhaul, so it's assumed that the cost of increased cleaning won't be greater than the cost of an engine overhaul.

(B)  is the clear choice

But I suspect a lot of people want clarification on  (C) :  "engine cleaning does not remove an airplane from service"

Well it's naturally assumed that you can't clean an aeroplane while it's operating, so I don't think the plan, which itself is centred on cost reduction, needs to address this.

Sunshine15 · Answer

Hello, I chose option D, please could you assist me as to why option D is wrong and not option B

GMATNinja · Answer

Sparrow Airlines' goal is is to "reduce  its  costs" by implementing the plan described in the passage. So, the relevant comparison is not between Sparrow Airlines and OTHER airlines -- it is between the costs to Sparrow Airlines before and after the plan is implemented.

Because the argument has nothing to do with the engine overhauls and fuel consumption of other airlines, (D) is not an assumption made in the argument. Put another way, it does not matter whether Sparrow Airlines has greater problems in these areas than other airlines -- all that matters is that Sparrow Airlines reduces costs by implementing the plan.

Compare that with (B):
 
This provides the correct comparison. If the goal is to reduce costs, the argument needs to assume that the new plan will not cost more than the previous plan. (B) tells us exactly that.

(B) is the correct answer.

I hope that helps!

Diya52 · Answer

I can see why B is the correct answer, but can someone tell me how to eliminate option C?

Diya52 · Answer

Thanks GMATNinja! I can see how C can be eliminated.

(PS: I was just watching GMATNinja live series in youtube and here i see GMATNinja has replied to my post. It could'nt get any better.)

GMATNinja · Answer

Thank you for the kind words, DiyaDutta ! Glad I could help a tiny bit. And it's funny, your post gives me a sudden urge to point out that the prize list for Game of Timers could make things even better...

Energon · Answer

B. the cost of monthly cleaning of an airplane's engines is not significantly greater in the long run than is the cost of an engine overhaul

Can we omit 'significantly' while choosing B.

I didn't chose B due to the word 'significantly' as I thought even if the cost of monthly cleaning is not significant but it may be the case that the cost is marginal but still it is greater than the cost of an engine overhaul.

Please elucidate.

Posted from my mobile device

Madlib82 · Answer

The airplane company wants to do monthly cleaning of its engines, instead of overhaul. So they  assume  that the cost between the two is not significant. An assumption is something that the author holds to be true in order to come to his or her conclusion.

GMATNinja · Answer

Also, remember that "cleaning an engine reduces its fuel consumption by roughly 1.2 percent." So even if the cost of monthly cleaning of an airplane's engines IS a tiny bit greater in the long run than is the cost of an engine overhaul, the savings in fuel costs might make up for that difference. In other words, if the cost of monthly cleaning of an airplane's engines is a tiny bit greater in the long run than is the cost of an engine overhaul, Sparrow's plan might STILL be able to reduce its costs (because of the fuel savings). So we do not HAVE to assume that the cost of monthly cleaning of an airplane's engines is NOT AT ALL greater in the long run than is the cost of an engine overhaul. However, if the cost of monthly cleaning of an airplane's engines is SIGNIFICANTLY greater in the long run than the cost of an engine overhaul, then it's unlikely that Sparrow's plan will lead to a reduction in its costs... and this argument will be in big trouble. As it turns out, the word "significantly" in choice (B) is actually quite significant.

I hope this helps!

unraveled · Answer

I'm writing purely for academic purpose and for fellow Gmatclub members who still have doubts specifically over option B.

Consider a hypothetical situation. Assuming that overhauling period is fixed at 18 months even after cleaning(though there is a slight possibility that overhauling period can be reduced), let's say that Sparrow Airlines postpones the overhauling time by 3 months. So,
Standard time taken for cleaning and overhauling = 6 + 18 = 24 months
Planned time taken for cleaning and overhauling = 9 + 18 = 27 months
LCM(24,27) = 27 * 8 months

Hence in 27*8 months(quite less than real world operational months) things would be at par with each other.
As per industry standard there would be 9 overhauls i.e. 18*9 months of non-flying time - pure cost incurrence. 
As per new plan there would be 8 overhauls i.e. 18*8 months of non-flying time.
Also, cleaning cost on monthly basis would be less relatively than cleaning cost on half-yearly basis. Cleaning time on monthly basis would be less than cleaning time on half-yearly basis. Additionally, the reduction in fuel consumption by roughly 1.2% is major cost reduction when in general airlines' 40-50% cost(outside the scope of passage) is fuel.

Hence, at least in ideal condition(Sparrow Airline's plan is a successful plan)
Cost based on industry standard ≥ Cost based on Sparrow Airline's plan 
However, option B says(not significantly plays a vital role here)
Cost based on Sparrow Airline's plan ≥ Cost based on industry standard

But Fuel cost is not considered in option B. Hence even if cost of monthly cleaning of an airplane's engines is slightly greater in the long run than is the cost of an engine overhaul it does not matter much since fuel cost can compensate that.

Hope this is helpful.

ArathyA · Answer

Solution 
 Passage Analysis 
• Sparrow Airlines is planning to reduce its costs by cleaning its planes' engines once a month, 
  o Sparrow Airlines has the intention to reduce its expenditure.
o The way they plan to do so is by cleaning the planes’ engines once every month.  
• rather than the industry standard of every six months.  
 o Industry standards demand cleaning the planes’ engines only once every six months.   
• With cleaner engines, Sparrow can postpone engine overhauls, which take planes out of service for up to 18 months.
  o Cleaner engines can help Sparrow Airlines to postpone engine overhauls.
o Engine overhauls take planes out of service for periods as long as 18 months.  
• Furthermore, cleaning an engine reduces its fuel consumption by roughly 1.2 percent.
  o In addition to this, monthly cleaning is beneficial from the fuel consumption perspective as well.
o Cleaning an engine decreases its fuel usage by around 1.2 percent.  
 Conclusion: Cleaning the planes’ engines once a month will result in overall reduction of costs for Sparrow Airlines in the long term.

Question Stem Analysis 
This question asks us to identify the assumption behind the airline’s plan.

Pre-thinking 
 Falsification Question 
In what scenario is it possible that cleaning the planes’ engines once every month does not lead to a decrease in overall costs in the long term?
Given that 
 • Cleaning once every month can postpone engine overhauls that take planes out of service for up to 18 months.
• Cleaning the engines decrease fuel consumption by roughly 1.2%.

Thought Process 
The Airlines plan to perform engine cleaning 6 times more often than what the industry standards enforce. The rationale behind this change is that cleaning can postpone engine overhauls that take planes out of service for long periods and also that monthly engine cleaning can reduce fuel consumption. If the cost of monthly engine cleaning does not exceed the losses created by engine overhauls and the higher fuel consumption that results from cleaning only once every six months, this plan can help reduce the overall cost of the airlines in the long term.

Falsification condition 
What if the cost of monthly engine cleaning is higher than the losses created by engine overhauls and the cost of higher fuel consumption that results from cleaning only every six months?
In that case the conclusion breaks down as there is no overall reduction in costs.
 Assumption 
In the long term, the cost of monthly engine cleaning will not be higher than the losses created by engine overhauls and the higher fuel consumption that result from cleaning only every six months.

Answer Choice Analysis 
(A) fuel prices are likely to rise in the near future and therefore cutting fuel (A) fuel (A) (A) fuel prices are likely to rise in the near future and therefore cutting fuel consumption is an important goal.
 INCORRECT 
Possibility of an increase in fuel price is not necessary for the plan to be valid. Hence this is not the correct choice.

(B) the cost of monthly cleaning of an airplane's engines is not significantly greater in the long run than is the cost of an engine overhaul.
 CORRECT 
This statement is in line with our pre-thinking and hence forms the correct answer.

(C) engine cleaning does not remove an airplane from service.
 INCORRECT 
If engine cleaning removes an airplane from service for a short time without affecting the revenue significantly, the conclusion will still hold. Hence this is not a correct assumption.

(D) Sparrow Airlines has had greater problems with engine overhauls and fuel consumption than other airlines have.
 INCORRECT 
This assumption is not needed for the plan to be valid. Hence, it is an incorrect choice.

(E) cleaning engines once a month will give Sparrow Airlines a competitive advantage over other airlines.
 INCORRECT 
Competitive advantage over other airlines is out of context since all the plan is concerned about is reducing the overall costs. Hence, it is an incorrect choice.

Hahahehe · Answer

Doesn't removing from service mean that air craft is being removed when it is needed? I'm not convinced by the argument that air craft can be in service and not needed. It should be either of them, not both. Please help in clarifying

egmat · Answer

Not necessarily! A flight is not consistently on its wings; it does get some time on the bay. The removal from service could be during times when it is rested if the required time is short, right? It could go back into service by the time it is needed! We cannot disregard this possibility.

kovid231 · Answer

Sparrow Airlines is planning to reduce its costs by cleaning its planes' engines once a month, rather than the industry standard of every six months. With cleaner engines, Sparrow can postpone engine overhauls, which take planes out of service for up to 18 months. Furthermore, cleaning an engine reduces its fuel consumption by roughly 1.2 percent.

The airline's plan assumes that
 
Assumption questions require us to find a leap between the conclusion and the premises.
Step 1: Find conclusion: Increase in cleaning of planes every month  will reduce cost. 
Premises: (These are facts and not opinions): 
- Primary benefit: Delay overhaul, a time period which once starts leaves the planes out of service for 18 months
- Secondary benefit: It also reduces fuel consumption

What could be the assumptions that the airline must be considering.
Let's see the answer options.

A. fuel prices are likely to rise in the near future and therefore cutting fuel consumption is an important goal
 Ok, seems nice but it talks about the secondary benefit not our main conclusion.

B. the cost of monthly cleaning of an airplane's engines is not significantly greater in the long run than is the cost of an engine overhaul
 Okay, this looks nice too, as it talks about the primary benefit that the airline assumes that the cost of cleaning every month is not not greater than the cost of engine overhaul. (This does 2 checkboxes for me, 1 it talks about the primary benefit and 2 it talks about cost reduction, which is central to our conclusion)

C. engine cleaning does not remove an airplane from service
 We are not given a cost implication angle in this option. While yes, removal of airplane for service might cause some impact, we aren't aware what that impact would be and for how long in comparison to removal of Airplanes for 18 months. 
 
D. Sparrow Airlines has had greater problems with engine overhauls and fuel consumption than other airlines have
 Out of scope answer, this doesn't relate to our conclusion. Our conclusion talks about reduction in cost.

E. cleaning engines once a month will give Sparrow Airlines a competitive advantage over other airlines
 Out of scope, we do not know this, it's not something we can assume with the passage information.

Both B and C are good options. In this case, if we look back at our conclusion, which was talking about a plan to reduce costs, the answer choice that clearly talks about the assumption in the same manner is  B . While you might like C, you can't choose C over B as the latter talks precisely about our conclusion.

Sparrow Airlines is planning to reduce its costs by cleaning its plane

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Sparrow Airlines is planning to reduce its costs by cleaning its plane

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards