Hi all,
I passed my C last week and am considering pushing on with the same training company to do C + E. However I notice that a few training companies in S wales (i am in Herefordshire) train drivers with flat trailers. The company which I was going to use for my training has two large curtainsider trailers.
Now the question - Is it easier to reverse with a flat trailer as visibility would be much better (especially with a cab rear window) ?
I know that in the real world I am going to have to reverse all sorts of big box trailers but why make things difficult for myself at the training / testing stage.
Any thoughts on this ?
First…Well done on your pass.
Yes it is easier with a flat bed to reverse, but it’s no great difference.
Honestly. If I can reverse a curtainsider I’m sure you will be able to & you will never regret taking your training with a curtainsider & can those that do it in a flat bed say the same ?.
Also you will not fail simply as a result of not using a flat bed.
If flat beds made any real difference every training school would use them instead of just the few, mainly less competent, trainers.
The question you should ask yourself before booking your C + E is not what kind of trailers do they use, but did they provide good quality training when I took my Class C.
When I was looking at training schools for my “C” I figured I would rather learn in something I was more likely to be driving - so went for the box. If a flatbed is easier than I should have no trouble handling it, not sure how that works the other way around.
I believe that the DSA are changing the regs so that flatbeds will not be able to be used in the future (although in their book this should have gone through before now).
G
It shouldn’t just be about passing the test, Loggo.
Using a real life set-up to do your training in instead of a 7.5 tonne flat bed with a shot flat bed trailer attached to it will do you the power of good. It is no comparison whatsoever of driving a full sized unit with 45ft curtain side trailer if you learn with a 7.5 tonne flat-bed with short flat trailer. Yes it might be 10 times easier, but this is why there are so many lunatic truckers on the roads who haven’t got a clue because of the corner-cutting tactics like I’ve described above.
My own personal take on it is that the LGV driving test should be at least 10 times as hard as what you might think it is now (car test should be 100 times as hard!) and then we might just start to see a decent standard of driving on the roads.
These week long LGV driving instruction courses are a joke and shouldn’t be allowed. There should be a compulsory minimum amount of OTR tuition allowed before being allowed to be put through your test. When I took my class 1 many years ago I seem to recall it was a 16 or 20 hour course, including my driving assessment and the test itself and it was over 5 days only. You simply cannot learn how to drive and reverse an artic properly in that space of time. I feel that there should be a minimum of 100 hours OTR tuition before being allowed to take your test and if that costs £10,000 in fees then so be it, sorry.
Good luck with the training, as mentioned a good training school along with a ‘realistic’ vehicle are the most important issues here IMO.
Good luck with the training and test Loggo 
And good luck to you Convoy - I see from another post that you have a test yourself shortly
Rob K - I am afraid I seem to have touched a nerve here. A little of my history. I started in the Traffic Office for Robet Wynn of Newport (Remember them ■■) in the late 60s and have driven 7.5t trucks off and on ever since. In the last six months I have driven a curtainsider regularly for a local firm and taken and passed my C license in this period. So at 54 years of age not a complete virgin although there is always a lot to learn.
Nevertheless any journey is measured by milestones and the C+E test is a major one of these. Like anyone of my age we are not used to being tested (particularly not if we are found to be wanting) and it makes sense to make things as straightforward as possible.
Thanks for the advice everyone - I think I had already really made my mind up to go back to my original school - they provide limitless free coffee !!
Loggo:
they provide limitless free coffee !!
Very nice
Cheers Loggo my training starts on the 4th july
and I haven’t started to go over the show me/tell me
questions yet 
.
Go for the Flatbed Loggo,like you say why make life hard for yourself,and especially as you’ve got experience.
I passed with a flatbed Drawbar which the training school had put red tape marks on the headers of the wagon and the drag,so on the reversing exercise once the red tape lined through you knew you were going back straight.
Naughty really but it helped 
Loggo I passed both LGV tests at 54 C+E last June. So we have that in common. I refused to take it in a flat bed as I thought I would be giving myself more problems later when I had to drive in the real world. I took mine in a waggon and drag all 65ft of it. The only thing I would do different is to take it in an artic as I haven’t driven a W&D since and found reversing an artic a completely different kettle of fish.
Liked your comments about taking a test at our age, very true.
The W&D was a box van body by the way. Good luck whatever you decide to do.
Whilst I agree with Rob in a sense (that’ll be a first then 
), I’d say go for the flat. The real learnin starts once you pass your test. The learning curve’s immense anyway, so why not make it easier for yourself to pass in the first place? With the flat, you get to see how the trailer reacts and learn from that whilst making your life that little bit easier .
It is certainly easier to watch a flat & see how it reacts, that way you can get used to what it is doing. However, its a completely different kettle of fish when you drive a curtain sider for the first time…I mean… everytime you turn a corner, you have this [zb] big headboard following you, a bit un nerving to say the least! 
Saying that though, you will have a million other things to worry about for the first few weeks, so I wouldnt worry about it too much, just go with whatever you feel happier with.
Mind you though, I wish they would get their act together & make it compulsory to go out with a loaded trailer. This carting round of fresh air on a test is a total joke, nothing really prepares you for going out on your first day fully freighted! 
T.■■
Sorry T, but if it needs stars to get it through the censor, it’s not allowed. Lib .
I have to agree with RobK too, I also would add that tests should be carried out in loaded trucks. Most drivers of a certain age will have already driven loaded trucks before attempting a test.
Even the blokes who didnt actually have to take a test, still understood what was required of them, as many had been employed as trailer boys or brake men.
Why on earth did they stop using HGV L Plates? 2 weeks on the road with a mate gave you all the experience you need to attempt a training course
I wasn’t going to mention it so as not to scare anyone , but running fully loaded scared the [zb] out of me the first time I went out in an artic. It’s why I say make the test as easy as you can for yourself, as you’ve hot a hell of a lot of learning to do afterwards .
at the end of the day it is your own choice, flatbeds are possibly slightly easier, which is why the training regulations are changing in 2007. after that time, box bodies or curtainsiders (i.e. not flat bed) will be required. A lot of schools are updating there fleets for this now
Personally I would always advise anyone training to go with a Box or Curtainsider, even unloaded it prepares you for the way the thing will behave on the road, and you do need to know, I might be coming the other way.
This bit about being able to turn around and look at a flat through the cab rear window is misleading to new drivers, it does not prepare you for the real world.
Learn to use the mirrors, get to know the length and width of your vehicle and practice, practice, practice.
The sooner the minimum spec vehicles are removed in 2007 the better, and I agree to some extent with Rob K about making the test more realistic, modern traffic conditions are not for the faint hearted.