An Airline carrying 86 passengers has resumed flying toward its destination after maintaining an unscheduled holding pattern for hours. Even...
GMAT Two Part Analysis : (TPA) Questions
An Airline carrying 86 passengers has resumed flying toward its destination after maintaining an unscheduled holding pattern for hours. Even given the strong headwind, the remaining fuel would be enough to safely reach the scheduled destination, 240 kilometres away, but the pilots have just been notified of a further substantial delay at the destination. They are reversing course and will proceed directly to another airport, also about 240 kilometres away, for refuelling. By the time the refuelling is complete, conditions will likely again delay continuing to the original destination airport.
The pilot's decision is likely based on a judgment that in these conditions, accepting a near-certain risk of Blank 1 is preferable to incurring the non negligible risk of Blank 2. Select for Blank 1 and for Blank 2 the options that, when inserted in the respective blanks, create the most accurate statement. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Phase 1: Owning the Dataset
Argument Analysis Table
| Passage Statement | Analysis & Implications |
|---|---|
| "An Airline carrying 86 passengers has resumed flying toward its destination after maintaining an unscheduled holding pattern for hours" |
|
| "Even given the strong headwind, the remaining fuel would be enough to safely reach the scheduled destination, 240 kilometres away" |
|
| "pilots have just been notified of a further substantial delay at the destination" |
|
| "They are reversing course and will proceed directly to another airport, also about 240 kilometres away, for refuelling" |
|
Key Pattern Identification
- Established Facts: Fuel is sufficient for destination but with no margin for delays
- Critical Relationship: Delay at destination + limited fuel = potential emergency
- Pilot's Choice: Accept certain inconvenience to avoid potential fuel emergency
Phase 2: Question Analysis & Prethinking
Understanding Each Part
- Part 1 Focus: What negative outcome are pilots definitely accepting by diverting?
- Part 2 Focus: What dangerous outcome are they trying to avoid?
- Relationship: Trading a certain minor negative for avoiding a potential major negative
Valid Inferences
- For Blank 1: Diverting definitely causes passenger inconvenience (longer journey, not reaching intended destination on time)
- For Blank 2: Continuing to original destination risks running out of fuel during the delay (serious emergency)
Phase 3: Answer Choice Evaluation
Option Analysis
"having to fly perpendicular to a strong wind current"
- Not mentioned in passage; only headwind discussed
- Cannot be inferred"having to refuel at the originally scheduled destination"
- They're going to a different airport to refuel
- Doesn't fit the scenario"causing further inconvenience to the passengers"
- Diverting definitely causes inconvenience
- Perfect fit for Blank 1 (near-certain risk)"encountering a serious emergency"
- Running out of fuel would be a serious emergency
- Perfect fit for Blank 2 (non-negligible risk being avoided)"ensuring that the passengers understand the reasoning"
- Not a risk; doesn't fit either blank
Answer Selection
- Blank 1: "causing further inconvenience to the passengers" - This is certain to happen by diverting
- Blank 2: "encountering a serious emergency" - This is the risk they're avoiding (fuel exhaustion)
The pilots are accepting the certainty of passenger inconvenience to avoid the risk of a fuel emergency.