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 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.
Apr 2912:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Apr 3001:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
May 0306:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Verbal trouble on GMAT? Fix it NOW! Join Sunita Singhvi for a focused webinar on actionable strategies to boost your Verbal score and take your performance to the next level.
30 Apr 2017, 06:43
Kudos
Bookmarks
Dear all,
this is my first try on the AWA. I took the first argument from the OG:
"The computerized on-board 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."
I tried to work along the sticky post "How to get 6.0 AWA".
A short feedback would be much appreciated.
Many thanks and kind regards
this is my first try on the AWA. I took the first argument from the OG:
"The computerized on-board 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."
I tried to work along the sticky post "How to get 6.0 AWA".
A short feedback would be much appreciated.
Many thanks and kind regards
Moderator Note: The argument states that transponders which are newly installed into commercial airplanes lead to fewer midair plane collisions.
Stated this way, the claim is based on a number of illogical assumptions. Furthermore, some major flaws can be detected which will also be discussed below.
First, the argument states that the transponders are installed into commercial airliners. This statement is quite weak because it assumes that only commercial airplanes will get this new device. The problem with this assumption is that it neglects privately owned airplanes which are also flying from airport to airport. Equipping these planes with the transponder could be a major advantage for flight security. This could further decrease midair collisions.
While the majority of air travel might be commercially driven, installing the transponder first and foremost in commercial airliners is reasonable. However private planes will would benefit from the added device as well.
The argument could have been much clearer mentioning the reasons behind equipping only commercially used airliners with the new transponder.
Second, the claim mentions that once the transponder is installed with planes, midair plane collisions will be solved. This is a bold statement and should be worth a closer look. In order to reduce collisions in the air, one must evaluate how well the transponder works and how reliable the transponder is. The argument is based on the assumption that the device works without any errors at all times. However, planes flying at high altitude may encounter bad weather, storms, thunder and lightning. The transponder must handle bad weather exceptionally well. The argument also tells us that the transponder basically works via radio signals. It is safe to say that other radio signals are out there and might interfere with the radio signal from another plance.
Before installing the transponder into planes, one should make sure that the technology of the transponder is tested for anything that could distort its functionality.
Finally, one should ask whether installing the transponder only in commercially used airplanes makes sense and why the transponders are not installed into privately used airplanes. Another question should be with regards to the transponder's reliability. Are there any circumstances during a flight that could distort the transponders functionality?
Without convincing answers to these questions, the argument is not very strong and the underlying assumptions are rather weak.
The argument is flawed due to the above mentioned reasons. In order to correctly derive a substantiated opinion, one should first get answers to the posed questions. For a differentiated opinion, all relevant information should be known in advance.
Without these information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
Stated this way, the claim is based on a number of illogical assumptions. Furthermore, some major flaws can be detected which will also be discussed below.
First, the argument states that the transponders are installed into commercial airliners. This statement is quite weak because it assumes that only commercial airplanes will get this new device. The problem with this assumption is that it neglects privately owned airplanes which are also flying from airport to airport. Equipping these planes with the transponder could be a major advantage for flight security. This could further decrease midair collisions.
While the majority of air travel might be commercially driven, installing the transponder first and foremost in commercial airliners is reasonable. However private planes will would benefit from the added device as well.
The argument could have been much clearer mentioning the reasons behind equipping only commercially used airliners with the new transponder.
Second, the claim mentions that once the transponder is installed with planes, midair plane collisions will be solved. This is a bold statement and should be worth a closer look. In order to reduce collisions in the air, one must evaluate how well the transponder works and how reliable the transponder is. The argument is based on the assumption that the device works without any errors at all times. However, planes flying at high altitude may encounter bad weather, storms, thunder and lightning. The transponder must handle bad weather exceptionally well. The argument also tells us that the transponder basically works via radio signals. It is safe to say that other radio signals are out there and might interfere with the radio signal from another plance.
Before installing the transponder into planes, one should make sure that the technology of the transponder is tested for anything that could distort its functionality.
Finally, one should ask whether installing the transponder only in commercially used airplanes makes sense and why the transponders are not installed into privately used airplanes. Another question should be with regards to the transponder's reliability. Are there any circumstances during a flight that could distort the transponders functionality?
Without convincing answers to these questions, the argument is not very strong and the underlying assumptions are rather weak.
The argument is flawed due to the above mentioned reasons. In order to correctly derive a substantiated opinion, one should first get answers to the posed questions. For a differentiated opinion, all relevant information should be known in advance.
Without these information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
abbs
Joined: 03 May 2017
Last visit: 19 Jun 2019
Posts: 8
Given Kudos: 19
Location: India
Schools: IE Sept19 Intake (A)
GMAT 1: 620 Q42 V32
GPA: 3.2
03 May 2017, 09:01
Kudos
Bookmarks
The argument states that transponders which are newly installed into commercial airplanes lead to fewer mid-air plane collisions.
Stated this way ( This is not very appropriate), the claim is based on a number of illogical assumptions. Furthermore, some major flaws can be detected which will also be discussed below. – You can use a better template than this.
First, the argument states that the transponders are installed( Check the tense. Its not yet installed. Is going to be installed) into commercial airliners. This statement is quite weak because it assumes that only commercial airplanes will get this new device. The problem with this assumption is that it neglects privately owned airplanes which are also flying from airport to airport (awkward, can find better expression) Equipping these planes with the transponder could be a major advantage for flight security. This could further decrease mid-air collisions.
While the majority of air travel might be commercially driven, installing the transponder first and foremost in commercial airliners is reasonable. However private planes will would benefit from the added device as well.
In this para instead of saying ” private planes will also benefit” which actually sounds like you are supporting the argument, you could say since the argument failed to consider all other aircrafts including cargo,private jets etc that will also cause collisions…….
The argument could have been much clearer mentioning the reasons behind equipping only commercially used airliners with the new transponder.
Second, the claim mentions that once the transponder is installed with(in) planes, midair plane collisions will be solved. This is a bold statement and should be worth a closer look. In order to reduce collisions in the air, one must evaluate how well the transponder works and how reliable the transponder is. The argument is based on the assumption that the device works without any errors at all times. However, planes flying at high altitude may encounter bad weather, storms, thunder and lightning. The transponder must handle bad weather exceptionally well. The argument also tells us that the transponder basically works via radio signals. It is safe to say that other radio signals are out there and might interfere with the radio signal from another plance.
Before installing the transponder into planes, one should make sure that the technology of the transponder is tested for anything that could distort its functionality.
Finally, one should ask whether installing the transponder only in commercially used airplanes makes sense and why the transponders are not installed into privately used airplanes. Another question should be with regards to the transponder's reliability. Are there any circumstances during a flight that could distort the transponders functionality?
Without convincing answers to these questions, the argument is not very strong and the underlying assumptions are rather weak.
This para sounds similar to first para.
The argument is flawed due to the above mentioned reasons. In order to correctly derive a substantiated opinion, one should first get answers to the posed questions. For a differentiated opinion, all relevant information should be known in advance.
Without these information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
Overall, I find your logic to be good enough. But you gotta be careful on the grammar,spelling and the construction. If you are non native you could find some good templates to be used as beginning and conclusion which will minimise the errors. Thanks..Good luck ..
Stated this way ( This is not very appropriate), the claim is based on a number of illogical assumptions. Furthermore, some major flaws can be detected which will also be discussed below. – You can use a better template than this.
First, the argument states that the transponders are installed( Check the tense. Its not yet installed. Is going to be installed) into commercial airliners. This statement is quite weak because it assumes that only commercial airplanes will get this new device. The problem with this assumption is that it neglects privately owned airplanes which are also flying from airport to airport (awkward, can find better expression) Equipping these planes with the transponder could be a major advantage for flight security. This could further decrease mid-air collisions.
While the majority of air travel might be commercially driven, installing the transponder first and foremost in commercial airliners is reasonable. However private planes will would benefit from the added device as well.
In this para instead of saying ” private planes will also benefit” which actually sounds like you are supporting the argument, you could say since the argument failed to consider all other aircrafts including cargo,private jets etc that will also cause collisions…….
The argument could have been much clearer mentioning the reasons behind equipping only commercially used airliners with the new transponder.
Second, the claim mentions that once the transponder is installed with(in) planes, midair plane collisions will be solved. This is a bold statement and should be worth a closer look. In order to reduce collisions in the air, one must evaluate how well the transponder works and how reliable the transponder is. The argument is based on the assumption that the device works without any errors at all times. However, planes flying at high altitude may encounter bad weather, storms, thunder and lightning. The transponder must handle bad weather exceptionally well. The argument also tells us that the transponder basically works via radio signals. It is safe to say that other radio signals are out there and might interfere with the radio signal from another plance.
Before installing the transponder into planes, one should make sure that the technology of the transponder is tested for anything that could distort its functionality.
Finally, one should ask whether installing the transponder only in commercially used airplanes makes sense and why the transponders are not installed into privately used airplanes. Another question should be with regards to the transponder's reliability. Are there any circumstances during a flight that could distort the transponders functionality?
Without convincing answers to these questions, the argument is not very strong and the underlying assumptions are rather weak.
This para sounds similar to first para.
The argument is flawed due to the above mentioned reasons. In order to correctly derive a substantiated opinion, one should first get answers to the posed questions. For a differentiated opinion, all relevant information should be known in advance.
Without these information, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.
Overall, I find your logic to be good enough. But you gotta be careful on the grammar,spelling and the construction. If you are non native you could find some good templates to be used as beginning and conclusion which will minimise the errors. Thanks..Good luck ..
Moderator:
