It is currently 25 Jun 2017, 12:23

### 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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 20 Jun 2012
Posts: 4
The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Jun 2012, 21:12
1
KUDOS
10
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

5% (low)

Question Stats:

84% (02:16) correct 16% (01:25) wrong based on 1297 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is that a used plane can be bought for one-third the price of the train line, and the plane, which is just as fast, can fly anywhere. The train would be a fixed linear system, and we live in a world that is spreading out in all directions and in which consumers choose the free-wheel systems (cars, buses, aircraft), which do not have fixed routes. Thus a sufficient market for the train will not exist.

Which of the following, if true, most severely weakens the argument presented above?

(A) Cars, buses, and planes require the efforts of drivers and pilots to guide them, whereas the train will be guided mechanically.

(B) Cars and buses are not nearly as fast as the high-speed train will be.

(C) Planes are not a free-wheel system because they can fly only between airports, which are less convenient for consumers than the high-speed train's stations would be.

(D) The high-speed train line cannot use currently underutilized train stations in large cities.

(E) For long trips, most people prefer to fly rather than to take ground-level transportation.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by honchos on 13 May 2016, 02:16, edited 1 time in total.
Corrected the Question after verifying from OG13
Manager
Affiliations: Project Management Professional (PMP)
Joined: 30 Jun 2011
Posts: 203
Location: New Delhi, India
Re: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Jul 2012, 06:03
2
KUDOS
parasena wrote:
The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is that a used plane can be bought for one-third the price of the train line, and the plane, which is just as fast, can fly anywhere. The train would be a fixed linear system, and we live in a world that is spreading out in all directions and in which consumers choose the free-wheel systems (cars, buses, aircraft), which do not have fixed routes. Thus a sufficient market for the train will not exist. to decrease in the next few years.

Which of the following, if true, most severely weakens the argument presented above?

(A) Cars, buses, and planes require the efforts of drivers and pilots to guide them, whereas the train will be guided mechanically.

(B) Cars and buses are not nearly as fast as the high-speed train will be.

(C) Planes are not a free-wheel system because they can fly only between airports, which are less convenient for consumers than the high-speed train's stations would be.

(D) The high-speed train line cannot use currently underutilized train stations in large cities.

(E) For long trips, most people prefer to fly rather than to take ground-level transportation.

The main argument of this blurb is that a sufficient market for the train will not exist mainly due to the fact that the train would be a fixed linear system, where as planes, cars and buses do not rely on the fixed linear system.

To weaken this argument IMO you need to state that planes cars and buses do not always rely on the free wheeler system/ or the fact that train would not all be a fixed linear system.

(C) weakens b/c it says that planes are also somewhat fixed as they can only be allowed to fly in b/w airports.

(A) tells us that trains are guided mechanically which could prove as an advantage to other systems, but it does not change that fact that it is still relying on a fixed linear system which is far inferior than a free wheeler system.
_________________

Best
Vaibhav

If you found my contribution helpful, please click the +1 Kudos button on the left, Thanks

Director
Status: Final Countdown
Joined: 17 Mar 2010
Posts: 537
Location: India
GPA: 3.82
WE: Account Management (Retail Banking)
Re: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Jul 2012, 08:15
Conclusion:

Buses,cars and plane will surpass the need to trains because a train is constrained to move on fixed roots unlike those of buses,cars and plane so, in an era when people are mostly willing to travel anywhere without any constrains the trains will vanish soon.

We need to weaken the conclusion by mentioning something which would mention that the trains are more or at least as convenient as buses.planes,and cars or
the buses,planes and cars are inconvenient than train.

(C) says it all.
_________________

" Make more efforts "
Press Kudos if you liked my post

Intern
Joined: 26 May 2012
Posts: 25
Re: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Sep 2012, 10:49
Aren't we questioning the premise(which is not allowed)? In C, it says planes are not free-wheel system.. in the premise, it says aircraft is a free-wheel system.
Manager
Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 194
Re: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2012, 23:40
It is more convenient for the commuters to travel by trains rather than planes because of its dependency on airports which can be far from where people live.

Only C weakens the argument presented.
Retired Moderator
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1657
Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Sep 2012, 08:35
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is that a used plane can be bought for one-third the price of the train line, and the plane, which is just as fast, can fly anywhere. The train would be a fixed linear system, and we live in a world that is spreading out in all directions and in which consumers choose the free-wheel systems (cars, buses, aircraft), which do not have fixed routes. Thus a sufficient market for the train will not exist.

Which of the following, if true, most severely weakens the argument presented above?

(A) Cars, buses, and planes require the efforts of drivers and pilots to guide them, whereas the train will be guided mechanically.
(B) Cars and buses are not nearly as fast as the high-speed train will be.
(C) Planes are not a free-wheel system because they can fly only between airports, which are less convenient for consumers than the high-speed train's stations would be.
(D) The high-speed train line cannot use currently underutilized train stations in large cities.
(E) For long trips, most people prefer to fly rather than to take ground-level transportation.

I agree with the OA.
However, it is tricky to find the conclusion (in blue) because the sentence in red seems to be the conclusion if you don't pay enough attention (It is at the end of the argument and used the word "thus").
In this sense, I would like to know whether there is a method or approach to find the conclusion in this type of tricky questions in a faster way. CR Powerscore Bible suggests to organize the ideas to find what statement is consequence of another statement; however, it takes time. Thanks!
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Manager
Joined: 23 Aug 2011
Posts: 81

### Show Tags

07 Sep 2012, 09:09

(A) Cars, buses, and planes require the efforts of drivers and pilots to guide them, whereas the train will be guided mechanically.-- This weakens the arguments and seems like a good contender, but the problem is it only talks about efforts of drivers.
(B) Cars and buses are not nearly as fast as the high-speed train will be. --Skips out on aircraft so will not effect argument.
(C) Planes are not a free-wheel system because they can fly only between airports, which are less convenient for consumers than the high-speed train's stations would be.--This is the best choice as it attacks the premise's reasoning that the trains being linear, fixed route systems are not preferred.
(D) The high-speed train line cannot use currently underutilized train stations in large cities.-Irrelevant
(E) For long trips, most people prefer to fly rather than to take ground-level transportation.-Again little out of scope, we are talking about trains not about the media of transport in general. Shell game answer.
_________________

Whatever one does in life is a repetition of what one has done several times in one's life!
If my post was worth it, then i deserve kudos

Moderator
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 3211

### Show Tags

07 Sep 2012, 10:04
is true that the conclusion not always is founded at the end of the stimulus (98% of time YES).

However, i disagree with you; for me the red phrase is the conclusion, and even not, the key point of the entire situation is that train are NOT convenient.

We have to find something that says train IS convenient. C does.

During this (huge, monster, crazy , amazing, unbelievable) exam one of the central point is : understand what's going on on the problem. As Ron says: be flexible

Without consider or not the conclusion.

First sentence: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is that a used plane can be bought for one-third the price of the train line, and the plane, which is just as fast, can fly anywhere. -------> what 's that mean: train as more expensive than plane.

Second sentence: he train would be a fixed linear system, and we live in a world that is spreading out in all directions and in which consumers choose the free-wheel systems (cars, buses, aircraft), which do not have fixed routes ---------> we live in a world with a lot of movement where wheels are a problem rather than plane.

Thierd sentence: Thus a sufficient market for the train will not exist ----------> Train has no (or will not) market sufficient enough to develope.

I do not see the process above takes much time. At most 20 seconds. This collimate with what CR Bible says

That's it
_________________
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Nov 2011
Posts: 304

### Show Tags

07 Sep 2012, 13:59
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
I also think the conclusion is in red. The blue part provides a few reasons (prices, range of mobility, etc.) to support the conclusion, which states there will be no market for the train line.

(C) directly weakens this conclusion by stating that there will be a market: using planes one can only fly from airport to airport. Thus many will still rely on trains for those areas in which using an airport will be inconvenient.

@metallicafan, Btw, was there another answer choice you were drawn to?
_________________

Christopher Lele
Magoosh Test Prep

Director
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 510
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Re: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Sep 2012, 22:04
CASE 1

Premise - The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is that a used plane can be bought for one-third the price of the train line, and the plane, which is just as fast, can fly anywhere. The train would be a fixed linear system, and we live in a world that is spreading out in all directions and in which consumers choose the free-wheel systems (cars, buses, aircraft), which do not have fixed routes.
Conclusion - Thus a sufficient market for the train will not exist.

Anything which weakens the conclusion is the answer or anything which strengthen that "the sufficient market for train will exist"

(A) Cars, buses, and planes require the efforts of drivers and pilots to guide them, whereas the train will be guided mechanically. (It does prove that it will affect in anyway the market)
(B) Cars and buses are not nearly as fast as the high-speed train will be. (Even planes are fast, this sentence has ignored planes so not relevant)
(C) Planes are not a free-wheel system because they can fly only between airports, which are less convenient for consumers than the high-speed train's stations would be. (This weakens the conslusion by showing that there would be sufficient market - This is our answer)
(D) The high-speed train line cannot use currently underutilized train stations in large cities. (Not relevant)
(E) For long trips, most people prefer to fly rather than to take ground-level transportation. (Strengthen the conclusion)

CASE 2

Premise - The train would be a fixed linear system, and we live in a world that is spreading out in all directions and in which consumers choose the free-wheel systems (cars, buses, aircraft), which do not have fixed routes.
Conclusion - The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is that a used plane can be bought for one-third the price of the train line, and the plane, which is just as fast, can fly anywhere.

Anything which weakens the conclusion is the answer or anything which strengthen that "the plane cannot fly anywhere" is the answer

Even in this case only option C makes sense.

But rightly said by metallicafan, prsence of "thus" pretty much assure us of the conclusion.
_________________

First Attempt 710 - http://gmatclub.com/forum/first-attempt-141273.html

Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Posts: 349
Location: European union
Re: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Oct 2012, 17:33
The conclusion is that consumer prefer wheel-free-systems. Thus, there is no market for trains.
Answer C state that planes are not wheel-free-systems ==> therefore there is a market for trains.
Intern
Status: Done!
Joined: 22 Mar 2012
Posts: 10
Location: India
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V35
GPA: 3
WE: Operations (Manufacturing)
Re: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Dec 2012, 09:29
First of all, we need to know the intention of author (or main point of the passage/argument). The author is intended to convince the readers that, in future, planes will be better than train.

Logical Structure:
Premise 1: Compared to high speed trains, planes don't cost so much as to deter their purchase.
Premise 2: Planes and High Speed Trains travel with comparable speeds.
Premise 3: Unlike Planes, trains have fixed routes.
Analogy 1: Bus and cars, which don't have fixed routes, are preferred by customers.

Conclusion : Hence, Trains will not be preferred to planes. (Market does not exist for trains)

Because this is a weaken question, we will be thrown some new info which will disrupt the logical flow or question the assumptions/analogies or expose some flaws in the causal relationship. So, let us check the new info provided in options.

(A) Cars, buses, and planes require the efforts of drivers and pilots to guide them, whereas the train will be guided mechanically.
This info, at most, builds a new premise that free-guidance might be a factor in customer's decision of transportation. But no info has been given whether 'guidance' will help or deter train transportation.

(B) Cars and buses are not nearly as fast as the high-speed train will be.
The real intention is comparing between plane and high speed trains. (Cars and buses info is just to establish analogy between free-wheel systems)

(C) Planes are not a free-wheel system because they can fly only between airports, which are less convenient for consumers than the high-speed train's stations would be.
This info tells us that, for consumers, train stations are convenient than airports. So this inserts a new info speaks against the intention of author.

(D) The high-speed train line cannot use currently underutilized train stations in large cities.
If the under-utilized stations cannot be used by high speed trains, train should not be preferred.

(E) For long trips, most people prefer to fly rather than to take ground-level transportation.
It says that personal choices make plane preferred transportation.

Only Option C speaks something relevant enough against the conclusion of the argument. So C weakens the argument.
Manager
Joined: 31 May 2012
Posts: 158
Re: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Dec 2012, 04:04
1
KUDOS
If the comparison is between Trains and planes, why cars and buses are introduced ? This creates little confusion with the idea of free wheel system.
@carcass, I like you skipped them while deducing the meaning out of it in second sentence.

'B' was another possible answer for me.
Manager
Joined: 01 Jan 2013
Posts: 63
Location: India
Re: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Oct 2013, 10:17
parasena wrote:
The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is that a used plane can be bought for one-third the price of the train line, and the plane, which is just as fast, can fly anywhere. The train would be a fixed linear system, and we live in a world that is spreading out in all directions and in which consumers choose the free-wheel systems (cars, buses, aircraft), which do not have fixed routes. Thus a sufficient market for the train will not exist. to decrease in the next few years.

Which of the following, if true, most severely weakens the argument presented above?

(A) Cars, buses, and planes require the efforts of drivers and pilots to guide them, whereas the train will be guided mechanically.

(B) Cars and buses are not nearly as fast as the high-speed train will be.

(C) Planes are not a free-wheel system because they can fly only between airports, which are less convenient for consumers than the high-speed train's stations would be.

(D) The high-speed train line cannot use currently underutilized train stations in large cities.

(E) For long trips, most people prefer to fly rather than to take ground-level transportation.

In this question how can we can weaken the conclusion by questioning the premise itself that planes are not a free wheel system,whereas in premise its mentioned consumers choose the free wheel systems (cars,buses,aircraft).
Aircraft and planes are two different things?
Manager
Status: Persevering
Joined: 15 May 2013
Posts: 218
Location: India
GMAT Date: 08-02-2013
GPA: 3.7
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Re: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Oct 2013, 10:37
abid1986 wrote:
parasena wrote:
The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is that a used plane can be bought for one-third the price of the train line, and the plane, which is just as fast, can fly anywhere. The train would be a fixed linear system, and we live in a world that is spreading out in all directions and in which consumers choose the free-wheel systems (cars, buses, aircraft), which do not have fixed routes. Thus a sufficient market for the train will not exist. to decrease in the next few years.

Which of the following, if true, most severely weakens the argument presented above?

(A) Cars, buses, and planes require the efforts of drivers and pilots to guide them, whereas the train will be guided mechanically.

(B) Cars and buses are not nearly as fast as the high-speed train will be.

(C) Planes are not a free-wheel system because they can fly only between airports, which are less convenient for consumers than the high-speed train's stations would be.

(D) The high-speed train line cannot use currently underutilized train stations in large cities.

(E) For long trips, most people prefer to fly rather than to take ground-level transportation.

In this question how can we can weaken the conclusion by questioning the premise itself that planes are not a free wheel system,whereas in premise its mentioned consumers choose the free wheel systems (cars,buses,aircraft).
Aircraft and planes are two different things?

Granted that attacking premise like this is rare, But none of the other options weaken the argument as this option does. So largely by POE, It is C.
_________________

--It's one thing to get defeated, but another to accept it.

e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2096
Re: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Oct 2013, 05:17
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
abid1986 wrote:
parasena wrote:
The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is that a used plane can be bought for one-third the price of the train line, and the plane, which is just as fast, can fly anywhere. The train would be a fixed linear system, and we live in a world that is spreading out in all directions and in which consumers choose the free-wheel systems (cars, buses, aircraft), which do not have fixed routes. Thus a sufficient market for the train will not exist. to decrease in the next few years.

Which of the following, if true, most severely weakens the argument presented above?

(A) Cars, buses, and planes require the efforts of drivers and pilots to guide them, whereas the train will be guided mechanically.

(B) Cars and buses are not nearly as fast as the high-speed train will be.

(C) Planes are not a free-wheel system because they can fly only between airports, which are less convenient for consumers than the high-speed train's stations would be.

(D) The high-speed train line cannot use currently underutilized train stations in large cities.

(E) For long trips, most people prefer to fly rather than to take ground-level transportation.

In this question how can we can weaken the conclusion by questioning the premise itself that planes are not a free wheel system,whereas in premise its mentioned consumers choose the free wheel systems (cars,buses,aircraft).
Aircraft and planes are two different things?

Hi Abid,

No, I don't think the argument is playing on the difference between aircraft and planes. By the way, technically, an airplane is a kind of aircraft.

It seems to me a rare case of attacking the premise.

Due to lack of any better options, this is the right one.

Thanks,
Chiranjeev
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10155
Re: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Mar 2014, 08:33
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.
Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Aug 2013
Posts: 311
Re: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 May 2014, 16:35
Can someone help clarify why A is not the right choice? I was stuck between A & C and I chose A b/c it address Cars, Buses AND Planes while C only tackles planes.
Intern
Joined: 16 May 2014
Posts: 15
Re: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 May 2014, 01:09
russ9 wrote:
Can someone help clarify why A is not the right choice? I was stuck between A & C and I chose A b/c it address Cars, Buses AND Planes while C only tackles planes.

Hi Russ9

To understand why A is incorrect, let us understand how the author arrives at the conclusion that a sufficient market for the train will not exist. The author focuses on comparing fixed linear system and free wheel systems & says that:
Consumers prefer free wheel systems (e.g. planes) over fixed linear systems (trains) --> So, sufficient market for train will not exist
So according to the author, consumer preference (of free wheel system over fixed routes) is the decisive factor that defines the future market

Option A talks about driving mechanism which has nothing to do with consumer preference (of free wheel system over fixed routes) which decides the future market. So the author's conclusion remains unaffected in this case.

To simplify, we can consider that the argument compares X and Y and says that since 'm' is the decisive factor and Y is better than X in this regard, therefore X will fail. Option A says that 'n' is a factor where X is better than Y. But does that weaken the argument? Hardly.

Now let us see why option C is correct. C says that both planes and trains do not belong to free wheel system and plane travel is less convenient than train travel. Therefore, consumer preference might favor trains over planes and hence a sufficient market for trains might exist in future. Again, we go with this option since none other are better and it succeeds in creating some amount of doubt on the validity of the argument.

Hop this helps!
Intern
Joined: 24 Sep 2014
Posts: 8
Re: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Oct 2014, 05:46
ab2014 wrote:
russ9 wrote:
Can someone help clarify why A is not the right choice? I was stuck between A & C and I chose A b/c it address Cars, Buses AND Planes while C only tackles planes.

Hi Russ9

To understand why A is incorrect, let us understand how the author arrives at the conclusion that a sufficient market for the train will not exist. The author focuses on comparing fixed linear system and free wheel systems & says that:
Consumers prefer free wheel systems (e.g. planes) over fixed linear systems (trains) --> So, sufficient market for train will not exist
So according to the author, consumer preference (of free wheel system over fixed routes) is the decisive factor that defines the future market

Option A talks about driving mechanism which has nothing to do with consumer preference (of free wheel system over fixed routes) which decides the future market. So the author's conclusion remains unaffected in this case.

To simplify, we can consider that the argument compares X and Y and says that since 'm' is the decisive factor and Y is better than X in this regard, therefore X will fail. Option A says that 'n' is a factor where X is better than Y. But does that weaken the argument? Hardly.

Now let us see why option C is correct. C says that both planes and trains do not belong to free wheel system and plane travel is less convenient than train travel. Therefore, consumer preference might favor trains over planes and hence a sufficient market for trains might exist in future. Again, we go with this option since none other are better and it succeeds in creating some amount of doubt on the validity of the argument.

Hop this helps!

I think this merely weakens the argument. There is still a chance that as car and bus are free wheel systems, passenger may prefer a free wheel system (car and bus) to fixed linear system (a train). As passengers are moving to bus and cars from trains and planes, there is still a chance that a sufficient market for train will not exist.
Re: The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is   [#permalink] 26 Oct 2014, 05:46

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 29 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
A bullet train travels 0 08 Jan 2016, 09:36
8 The wroker's association of the North Western Train lines Co - CR 5 28 Feb 2016, 09:55
7 High Difficulty CR Question 2 23 Jul 2014, 01:20
17 Advertisement in the Harptown Train Station:... 7 15 Jun 2016, 18:19
15 The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an 14 26 Aug 2016, 05:00
Display posts from previous: Sort by