This question tests the ability to interpret a statement that describes a discrepancy between theoretical soundness and practical challenges, and requires the understanding of how these can be divergent. **Core Concept:** This question focuses on understanding the meaning of 'theoretically sound' and 'practical challenges' and how they contrast. It requires the understanding that theoretical validity doesn’t always translate to ease of implementation. Key to this is knowing the function of ‘though’ as a connector of contrasting concepts. **Solution:** * **Option A:** This option is incorrect because the statement specifically mentions that the design was 'theoretically sound,' implying it was not flawed in theory. * **Option B:** This option is incorrect because the text states that ‘challenges’ arose from the design, which conflicts with it being ‘effective in practice.’ * **Option C:** This option accurately captures the essence of the statement, which acknowledges the theoretical validity of the design while also recognizing the difficulties faced in practice. * **Option D:** This option is incorrect because the statement explicitly indicates that the design was 'theoretically sound,' contradicting the idea that it was theoretically flawed. **Correct Answer:** C **Easy-mistake reminder:** The phrase 'though theoretically sound' and 'practical challenges' are in contrast. The word ‘though’ is a key indicator that two concepts may not be alike. It is easy to mistake the theoretical soundness for practical success but the 'unforeseen logistical constraints' reveals the practical pitfalls.