LSAT 103 – Section 2 – Question 10

LSAT 103 - Section 2 - Question 10

September 1998

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:07

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT103 S2 Q10
+LR
Necessary assumption +NA
Link Assumption +LinkA
A
1%
157
B
2%
159
C
92%
168
D
1%
157
E
5%
156
140
147
154
 +Medium 149.468 +SubsectionMedium

Commercial passenger airplanes can be equipped with a collision-avoidance radar system that provides pilots with information about the proximity of other airplanes. Because the system warns pilots to take evasive action when it indicates a possible collision, passengers are safer on airplanes equipped with the system than on comparable airplanes not so equipped, even though the system frequently warns pilots to evade phantom airplanes.

Summary
The argument concludes that passengers are safer on airplanes with a collision-evasion system equipped, even though the system frequently warns pilots of phantom airplanes. This is supported by the premise that the system warns pilots to evade possible collisions.

Notable Assumptions
The argument assumes that the phantom warnings don’t create more danger than the system prevents. For example, that pilots don’t take dangerous evasion maneuvers in response to phantom warnings.
It also assumes that pilots actually respond to the system’s warnings frequently enough to avoid possible collisions. Otherwise, the system’s presence wouldn’t make much difference to safety at all.

A
Passengers feel no safer on airplanes equipped with the radar system than on comparable airplanes not so equipped.
Whether or not passengers feel safer isn’t important to determining whether or not they are safer—in fact, it’s not relevant at all.
B
Warnings given by a collision-avoidance system about phantom airplanes are not caused by distorted radar signals.
The possible cause of phantom airplane warnings doesn’t make any difference to the argument, so can’t be necessary.
C
The frequency of invalid warnings will not cause pilots routinely to disregard the system’s warnings.
For the argument to make sense, pilots have to actually act on the system’s warnings—otherwise the system would make no difference. If we negated this, meaning pilots just ignored the warnings, that would leave the conclusion unsupported.
D
Commercial passenger airplanes are not the only planes that can be equipped with a collision-avoidance system.
Whether or not the system can be equipped on other types of planes is irrelevant to whether it makes commercial air passengers safer.
E
The greatest safety risk for passengers traveling on commercial passenger airplanes is that of a midair collision.
The argument just claims that passengers are safer with the system than without it. Whether that means they’re a lot safer or a little safer doesn’t really matter, so this isn’t a necessary assumption.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 103 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply