Q10 - Commercial passenger airplanes can be

[ymcho2013]

I understand why answer choice (C) could be a correct answer to this necessary assumption problem; if you negate choice (C) to say the frequency of invalid warnings will cause pilots to IGNORE warnings, then the system itself becomes "useless" in maintaining the passengers' safety, thereby destroying the argument that the system that alerts pilots of possible collisions makes planes with this system to be safer than those planes that don't have the system..

However, I'm having a hard time eliminating answer choice (E) as a wrong answer - if you negate it, it states that the greatest risk for passengers is NOT that of a midair collision. If that's true, then wouldn't it destroy the argument that having the system makes passengers on those planes with the system safer? Because if collisions aren't the greatest risk, then having the system wouldn't necessarily make having it safer either....

If anyone could please help, I would be really grateful!
Thanks so much!

[timmydoeslsat]

Good points made by you.

On necessary assumption questions, be wary of big words like most, all, greatest, best, etc. It would take a great feat to make those words necessary.

In this case, even if midair collisions is not the greatest safety risk, perhaps losing power in the plane is, does that mean that the plane that can avoid midair collisions better than a plane not so equipped is NOT safer?

Of course not. Just because something does not constitute the greatest risk or threat does not mean that one thing cannot be safer than another. After all, if the planes are exactly the same other than the radar equipment, which we seem to be led to believe, then the greatest safety risk would be prevalent equally on both sides. However, the benefit of this radar equipment could still make one plane safer than the other.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Nice explanation Timmy, exactly right!

Suppose you face many health risks: cancer, heart attack, HIV infection, etc. The greatest risk you face is, let's say heart attack. Then along comes an immunization for HIV infection. Wouldn't that make you safer than before?

Just as Timmy said, something need not pose the greatest risk for it still to be benefit to remove that risk. This is a common LSAT "trick" the writers use.

Answer choice (C) is really interesting it eliminates a danger to the argument. Essentially it says that those equipped with the system would be no safer than those not equipped with the system. Notice how the answer is couched in negative language. This too is a hallmark of answer choices that defend the argument from something devastating.

Lets look at the incorrect answers:

(A) is irrelevant. We don't care about how the passengers feel. Just whether they're safer.
(B) is irrelevant. We don't care what causes the phantom signal. Instead we care about the safety of planes equipped with the system vs those not equipped.
(D) is irrelevant, since extension of the safety mechanism to noncommercial passenger airplanes does not address the relative of safety of planes equipped with the system vs those that are not.
(E) is too strong. One problem the evasion-system may help address does not need to be the most dangerous risk that passengers face in order for the evasion-system to be net benefit.

Hope that helps!

[ottoman]

Can you explain why B is irrelevant again? If the warnings are caused by distorted radar signals, wouldn't B destroy the argument?

[ywan1990]

Can you explain why B is irrelevant again? If the warnings are caused by distorted radar signals, wouldn't B destroy the argument?

Because (B) says warnings about phantom airplane are caused by distorted signal. Don't assume it implies distorted signal in general. In other words, correct warnings may not be affected by the distorted signal at all.

[tommywallach]

Perfect, Ywan!

-t

[MensaNumber]

I am sorry but I don't understand why C needs to be assumed. Even if the pilots routinely ignore the warnings, they will still pay heed to a few warnings. This will still be helpful rather than not having any warnings at all on the planes which dont have the system. Choice C doesnt say that the pilots will ignore all the warning owing to false warnings. Can you pls help?

[AshleyL49]

Serious question: How was I supposed to know that “ phantom” was a over exaggerated phenom that the test makers added in to discredit the idea of the radar detection system ?!?! I thought the phantom was an actual name for another plane smh

[WhimsicalWillow]

Serious question: How was I supposed to know that “ phantom” was a over exaggerated phenom that the test makers added in to discredit the idea of the radar detection system ?!?! I thought the phantom was an actual name for another plane smh

I looked at the words "even though" and saw it as admitting there were issues with the system.