|
|
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.
19 Feb 2026, 14:34
Kudos
Bookmarks
Increased use of autonomous delivery drones is sometimes advocated as a safe way to transport packages in crowded urban areas. But opponents of drone delivery point to the 60 incidents involving unexpected loss of control that were reported just last year at two existing drone-delivery companies operating in major cities. Since designs for proposed new drone fleets include no additional safeguards to prevent such losses of control, accidents will only become more prevalent if use of drone delivery increases.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
A. In only a small fraction of the reported incidents did a drone’s loss of control result in property damage or injury.
B. Other methods of package delivery, such as bicycle couriers, have not been proven less accident-prone than drone delivery.
C. The current fleets at existing drone-delivery companies are large enough to handle increased delivery volume without any need for new drones.
D. The frequency of unexpected loss-of-control reports in newly launched drone fleets is about the same as the frequency in older fleets.
E. At the two companies where losses of control were reported, many drone operators had received only minimal training on how to intervene when automated systems malfunctioned.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
A. In only a small fraction of the reported incidents did a drone’s loss of control result in property damage or injury.
B. Other methods of package delivery, such as bicycle couriers, have not been proven less accident-prone than drone delivery.
C. The current fleets at existing drone-delivery companies are large enough to handle increased delivery volume without any need for new drones.
D. The frequency of unexpected loss-of-control reports in newly launched drone fleets is about the same as the frequency in older fleets.
E. At the two companies where losses of control were reported, many drone operators had received only minimal training on how to intervene when automated systems malfunctioned.
19 Feb 2026, 14:34
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
Increased use of autonomous delivery drones is sometimes advocated as a safe way to transport packages in crowded urban areas. But opponents of drone delivery point to the 60 incidents involving unexpected loss of control that were reported just last year at two existing drone-delivery companies operating in major cities. Since designs for proposed new drone fleets include no additional safeguards to prevent such losses of control, accidents will only become more prevalent if use of drone delivery increases.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
A. In only a small fraction of the reported incidents did a drone’s loss of control result in property damage or injury.
B. Other methods of package delivery, such as bicycle couriers, have not been proven less accident-prone than drone delivery.
C. The current fleets at existing drone-delivery companies are large enough to handle increased delivery volume without any need for new drones.
D. The frequency of unexpected loss-of-control reports in newly launched drone fleets is about the same as the frequency in older fleets.
E. At the two companies where losses of control were reported, many drone operators had received only minimal training on how to intervene when automated systems malfunctioned.
The opponents conclude that increasing the use of autonomous drone delivery will make accidents more prevalent, relying on evidence that two existing drone companies reported many losses of control last year and that new fleets will not include additional design safeguards.
This reasoning assumes that the high incident rate is primarily due to the drones’ design and thus will scale upward as more similarly designed drones are deployed, rather than being driven by some other correctable factor at the current companies.
(A) Incorrect. This choice reduces the severity of incidents (few caused damage or injury) but does not challenge the claim that incidents will become more prevalent. The argument is about frequency, not impact.
(B) Incorrect. This compares drones to other delivery methods. Even if alternatives aren’t safer, that does not weaken the specific prediction that drone accidents will rise with increased drone use.
(C) Incorrect. If existing fleets could handle more deliveries, new drones might not be needed, but increased use could still mean more flights and potentially more incidents. This does not undermine the key causal link about design leading to higher prevalence.
(D) Incorrect. Saying new fleets have about the same incident frequency as old ones supports the idea that new designs won’t reduce losses of control. That aligns with, rather than weakens, the argument.
(E) Correct. This choice suggests the incidents at the two existing companies may be largely due to inadequate operator training, not to drone design. If better training could substantially lower losses of control, then expanding drone delivery with the same designs would not necessarily increase accident prevalence. This directly attacks the argument’s core assumption.
Answer: E
Increased use of autonomous delivery drones is sometimes advocated as a safe way to transport packages in crowded urban areas. But opponents of drone delivery point to the 60 incidents involving unexpected loss of control that were reported just last year at two existing drone-delivery companies operating in major cities. Since designs for proposed new drone fleets include no additional safeguards to prevent such losses of control, accidents will only become more prevalent if use of drone delivery increases.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
A. In only a small fraction of the reported incidents did a drone’s loss of control result in property damage or injury.
B. Other methods of package delivery, such as bicycle couriers, have not been proven less accident-prone than drone delivery.
C. The current fleets at existing drone-delivery companies are large enough to handle increased delivery volume without any need for new drones.
D. The frequency of unexpected loss-of-control reports in newly launched drone fleets is about the same as the frequency in older fleets.
E. At the two companies where losses of control were reported, many drone operators had received only minimal training on how to intervene when automated systems malfunctioned.
The opponents conclude that increasing the use of autonomous drone delivery will make accidents more prevalent, relying on evidence that two existing drone companies reported many losses of control last year and that new fleets will not include additional design safeguards.
This reasoning assumes that the high incident rate is primarily due to the drones’ design and thus will scale upward as more similarly designed drones are deployed, rather than being driven by some other correctable factor at the current companies.
(A) Incorrect. This choice reduces the severity of incidents (few caused damage or injury) but does not challenge the claim that incidents will become more prevalent. The argument is about frequency, not impact.
(B) Incorrect. This compares drones to other delivery methods. Even if alternatives aren’t safer, that does not weaken the specific prediction that drone accidents will rise with increased drone use.
(C) Incorrect. If existing fleets could handle more deliveries, new drones might not be needed, but increased use could still mean more flights and potentially more incidents. This does not undermine the key causal link about design leading to higher prevalence.
(D) Incorrect. Saying new fleets have about the same incident frequency as old ones supports the idea that new designs won’t reduce losses of control. That aligns with, rather than weakens, the argument.
(E) Correct. This choice suggests the incidents at the two existing companies may be largely due to inadequate operator training, not to drone design. If better training could substantially lower losses of control, then expanding drone delivery with the same designs would not necessarily increase accident prevalence. This directly attacks the argument’s core assumption.
Answer: E
09 Mar 2026, 08:22
Kudos
Bookmarks
Option E I felt was irrelevant though. The fact of operators having minimal training need not be correlated to how dangerous a drone is at all. IMO it makes a serious assumption here, I can see how it weakens if looked through a very particular, narrow lens. I can also make similar assumption for option B similarly tbh. Kindly help me out.
bb
