Although the problems identified with the SR7 (i) Rover, designed to c
[#permalink]
06 Dec 2024, 06:03
OE
In all probability the SR7 Rover, designed to go out into space and gather intelligence, would not be named a Canard (A) Rover as canard means a derogatory story, report or rumor. Option A certainly does not imply the exploratory nature of the mission but rather raises questions about its legitimacy. Neither would the Rover be named Alliance (C) as that would imply a pact between organizations or nations that is not supported by the passage. The SR7 is going out on a reconnaissance (B) mission to conduct an on-theground search/investigation with the aim of bringing back information for the superiors, in this case, the scientists.
Clearly the SR7 suffers from a number of small problems or glitches (F) that are not significant on their own, but when taken together have the potential to delay the launch of the Rover. If the project were merely riddled (loaded) with gimmicks (D), or ingenious and novel stratagems to attract attention and increase appeal, there probably would be no threat to the launch. Furthermore, gimcracks (E) being showy, insignificant trifles such as one might pick up at a country fair, are not the issue here, and option E must be eliminated. F, glitches, or small, or idiosyncratic problems, is the correct answer.
Taking the bull by the horns is synonymous with taking action, and taking action, in this case amounts to launching the SR7. Option H must be eliminated as it would make the sentence repetitive and nonsensical, suggesting that scientists "...launch the SR7 or launch the SR7." Scientists should not throw the baby out with the bathwater (I), or scrap the entire SR7 because of a few glitches, but should "launch the SR7 or go back to the drawing board" to redesign it as stated in option I.