陈向东逻辑-反对-是否还要培训pilots

evelyn205205 · 发表于 2011-7-5 11:20:23

“This company will not be training any more pilots in the foreseeable future, since we have 400 trained pilots on our waiting list who are seeking employment. The other five major companies each have roughly the same number of trained pilots on their waiting lists, and since the projected requirement of each company is for not many more than 100 additional pilots, there will be no shortage of personnel despite the current upswing in the aviation industry".
Which one of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the accuracy of the above conclusion?

(A) Most of the trained pilots who are on awaiting list for a job are on the waiting lists of all the major companies
(B) In the long run, pilot training will become necessary to compensate for ordinary attrition.
(C) If no new pilots are trained, there will be an age imbalance in the pilot work force.
(D) The quoted personnel projections take account of the current upswing in the aviation industry.
(E) Some of the other major companies are still training pilots but with no presumption of subsequent employment.

答案是A。A的逻辑我明白，以供小于求来反对原文的逻辑。
我的疑问是B错在哪儿呢？如果没有飞行员来代替随时可能出现的人员损耗问题，那么航空公司不会面临人员不足的情况么？
期待NN们！

evelyn205205 · 发表于 2011-7-5 13:15:25

自己顶一下

evelyn205205 · 发表于 2011-7-5 14:06:42

hello，is there anyone who can help me？

evelyn205205 · 发表于 2011-7-5 14:57:03

hello

evelyn205205 · 发表于 2011-7-5 20:30:47

why is B wrong？

sanlingjie · 发表于 2011-7-6 09:58:28

B很明显是不对的，因为原文的结论是This company will not be training any more pilots in the foreseeable future，而B讨论的是in the long run，讨论的并非是一个时间段，long run 是不可预知的未来。

sanlingjie · 发表于 2011-7-6 10:01:00

哈哈，我发现原来我之前在你的How to make progress on CR? Pls help me~~~帖子里和你互相诉过CR的苦还互相鼓励过~~~~~~~太逗了。。。这么巧~~~~

evelyn205205 · 发表于 2011-7-6 11:47:33

哦对哦~时间不一样，我怎么没发现呢，哎~

陈向东逻辑-反对-是否还要培训pilots

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()