Like it says, let’s have a sensible discussion on whether folks think they should stick with the current system of C then CE or if they would prefer to go direct to CE. And, if that’s the case, is a day or 2 on a C desirable?
I’m not expressing an opinion, except to say that any configuration of training delivered by a good instructor with correct facilities and a decent vehicle will succeed. But I’m interested in your views. (Clearly those folks with a current C provisional are in a strange situation).
I have just passed my C licence with you guys, I came from been used to a large vans and motorhomes and I found it really easy to get used to the size probably didn’t need 4 days training.
For me personally I would have jumped at the chance to do CE in one go but for most people straight from a car to a CE is a big difference.
Time in the C truck would still be good to get used to the size, but everybody will be different just how much time, an hour, half day full day etc.
If CE direct isn’t going to be massively cheaper I aren’t that disappointed I missed out paying in two payments is easier for me.
I guess depending on experience and ability to learn will be different for everybody, maybe more than ever an assessment is needed to find out what is best for each person.
I’ve been wondering this exact same question. I have recently got my C provisional and passed my theory tests and wondering what the best route is for the practical training. I am in the strange situation you describe Pete!
Although I can see the benefits of going straight to CE, I am beginning to think that the staged route may be better. It somehow makes sense to learn the rigid first, then go onto CE. I also wonder how long it will take for the straight to CE system to be fully up and running. I would like to hear what instructors think is the best way and what they recommend. I am going to speak to local training schools and see what they think.
Are trainees today less capable than we were before the EU introduced the changes
If no then, apart from higher general traffic levels, what is the problem in going back to what we did prior to those changes
I would say it all depends on the person and how they handle driving larger vehicles.
I know people who baulk at the idea of driving a van compared to a car.
There are also people who drive big fat SUV’s that have no road sense and idea of the size of their vehicle but just feel they are safe because they drive a large SUV.
I’d suggest it all depends on the trainer and how they feel someone is comfortable to confident enough in a larger vehicle. And the only way to decide the best route is an assessment drive with the trainer.
There is never a one size fits all, some will be just fine going from car to artic probably and some won’t and will need more work and maybe need to get used to a rigid first before tackling the artic.
Maybe I am based but I passed my car test and within months was driving long wheel base vans and it never bothered me.
I then started to drive 7.5 ton trucks and then went on to do my C. It took me til 2016 to finally decide to take the plunge to do artic. I wish I had done it many years ago but never did.
I do think that sometimes it helps people to slowly work their way up from smaller to larger vehicles.
But on the flip side I also think I could have easily gone from car to artic all those years ago, but maybe I was too young at the time to understand the responsibility of driving such a large vehicle back then.
But as a caveat even once you’ve passed and driving them it still a learning curve every day, anyone who says otherwise is talking rubbish.
I also wonder how long it will take for the straight to CE system to be fully up and running. I would like to hear what instructors think is the best way and what they recommend. I am going to speak to local training schools and see what they think.
I think most schools will be able to offer direct to CE in January, or thereabouts.
Beware recommendations from trainers. Bear in mind that most instructors have never taught direct to CE - they would have been instructing before 1997 for them to have any experience. There are huge problems within the training industry where the fleets are geared more towards C. So they may be persuaded to recommend C training first.
I work with PSTT. And that is set up in such a way that it can respond to any outcome without concerns about fleet.
As I started training in 1971 (buses) and 1974 (trucks) I have a world of experience in training direct to CE which I will be passing on to the training staff at PSTT.
The “normal” training duration for car to artic pre - 1997 was around 40 hours. But it was a different world. Let’s not forget that some trainees had never driven a car!! On the plus side, there was a little less traffic (though the traffic in Mansfield in 2021 is still less than the London traffic when I started in 1971!) Candidates had often spent time in and around trucks. Maybe with Dad, or a mate up the street. There were many more opportunities to get involved before taking the plunge. But the H&S interference officers have pretty well put a stop to that.
BUT, pre - 1997 we had a forward steering exercise (around cones on the reversing area), a gear exercise, effectively compulsory gearboxes - often crash and never air assisted changes. Downhill start. No power steering. Vacuum brakes and a ratchet handbrake. No wide angle mirrors. And drivers’ seats that may or may not be adjustable. If you were lucky, you may have a heater. But, in any case, you would cook in summer with the engine being sat at the side of you. Remarkably, this feature never seemed to work efficiently in winter! Demisters - haha. Dream on.
We also had shorter, flat trailers as opposed to the more industry realistic traielrs in use today.
The test was longer. 3 tests per day. We are about to go to 5 per day.
Without a doubt, the standard required has dropped over the years.
We now uncouple and recouple - which we never used to do. It was a couple of questions.
So it’s a real jumble!! Given that trucks are SO easy to drive now, simply put it into D and steer it, surely around 30 hours must do it? Before I retired last year, I was teaching C in 14 hours and CE very comfortably in 20 hrs. Combine the two and it makes 34 hours. Now take off the time to familiarise with a different vehicle and take the undoubted stress out of the reversing as part of the driving test, and it makes around 30 hours perfectly reasonable.
But I also accept that some will prefer to either complete a CAT C course and test before moving on. Or they may wish to have a bit of time (5 - 10hrs?) in a CAT C to get the feel for a larger vehicle. Because they are a lot bigger now than they used to be.
ROG:
Are trainees today less capable than we were before the EU introduced the changes
If no then, apart from higher general traffic levels, what is the problem in going back to what we did prior to those changes
This!
In any industry, there are some “veterans” that probably struggle every day after 30 years to do their job, and get upset at “new guys” jumping in doing what they struggle to do, and they get annoyed/upset/whatever at themselves, and complain.
In the 1970s airliners had 4 crew. By the 1980s, that was reduced to 3 crew. Today? 2 crew and they are already certifying the A350 for single pilot operations.
My personal view is it is entirely dependent upon the mentality of the person and their willingness to learn and ability to analyze problems.
The first day I flew a glider with 50 ft wingspan was the same flight I landed it. Sure, an instructor was sat behind me, but it was me at the controls flying it.
Things are only hard if you believe they are hard. What you mustn’t be is arrogant and “know it all”. I do a lot of study and analysis before I do something.
What is the difference between a rigid with drawbar trailer and an artic? Where it bends and how long the trailer is. The rest is the same.
Who taught the Wright Brothers to fly?
(Yes, my posts are aviation-heavy…guess my current industry LOL).
Having done my tests in the last 18 months, I found it helped me to do the rigid first.
Gave me a good understanding of the test itself and what was required.
Made it easier to be confident in the artic.
Not sure I’d have done as well as I did in the artic without doing rigid first.
It sort of preps you…
I will be going straight to CE. I have been driving either professionally or for my work for over thirty years in all sorts of vehicles upto 7.5t. I currently work as a 7.5t driver, I am hoping my employer will pay for my training, so I will be paid while I train and have a guaranteed job at the end, they don’t have class C vehicles so there’s not much point going for C.
ROG:
Are trainees today less capable than we were before the EU introduced the changes
If no then, apart from higher general traffic levels, what is the problem in going back to what we did prior to those changes
The main difference would be 21 years old vs 18, whether that makes a difference I dont know.
(I know military was different)
ROG:
Are trainees today less capable than we were before the EU introduced the changes
If no then, apart from higher general traffic levels, what is the problem in going back to what we did prior to those changes
The main difference would be 21 years old vs 18, whether that makes a difference I dont know.
(I know military was different)
Is there that many young people wanting to become truck drivers. A lot of the people on here seem to be older and looking for a change from their current career. Maybe the younger generation are getting their truck driving advice on tiktok
Pete S:
Like it says, let’s have a sensible discussion on whether folks think they should stick with the current system of C then CE or if they would prefer to go direct to CE. And, if that’s the case, is a day or 2 on a C desirable?
I’m not expressing an opinion, except to say that any configuration of training delivered by a good instructor with correct facilities and a decent vehicle will succeed. But I’m interested in your views. (Clearly those folks with a current C provisional are in a strange situation).
Fire away, Pete S
I would definitely say for someone who’s not driven a big van it would definitely be advantageous to do a few “laps” with a Rigid. If only to get used to the higher driving position and the inevitable difficulties that arises as a result of that, [blind spots, judging gaps etc]. And it means they can get familiar with driving a truck, being forward of the front axle is not what most people are used to when manoeuvring. I think it just makes sense in that way.
From the instructors perspective I see it as a benefit too, they still get use out of their Class2 vehicles and the risk of damages on their Class1 vehicles is minimized, although I’m told Artic units are often cheaper than rigid bodies. So not 100% sure on that one but at least I think it’s a more risk free strategy to have people drive on class2 before they get into the class1’s even if they’re allowed to drive class1 straight away…
I would put it like this, on your regular driving test, some people lack confidence or haven’t shown the instructor enough for them to feel confident so often they go to a secluded car park where someone can just get used to the pedals etc, and ultimately I think class2 serves that purpose.
flammen:
I would definitely say for someone who’s not driven a big van it would definitely be advantageous to do a few “laps” with a Rigid. If only to get used to the higher driving position and the inevitable difficulties that arises as a result of that, [blind spots, judging gaps etc]. And it means they can get familiar with driving a truck, being forward of the front axle is not what most people are used to when manoeuvring. I think it just makes sense in that way.
I wouldn’t have thought many training companies are going to hold a rigid back so a trainee can have a short go in one, I would have thought the rigid driving is going to be a day or two or nothing.
The learner is going to have to get used to driving a large vehicle with all that it entails and I would have thought that having to step up to a longer vehicle that bends in the middle part way through the training is adding unnecessary complications.
If a wannabee HGV driver really lacks confidence there may be a psychological advantage to starting in a shorter rigid vehicle, but otherwise I suspect the disadvantages of starting in a rigid then changing to an artic may outweigh any possible advantages.
Having said that, I suppose only time will make it clear what the success and failure rate is in each possible scenario, it’s going to be a learning curve for the trainers as well as the trainees
Pete, I can’t answer which is best yet as I’ve never set foot in either, but I can tell you what I want to and have booked to do.
I cancelled my C training and just booked CE training. It was going to be a C test on the fifth day, but instead, it will be a CE test on the eighth day. It saves me £1,000. I’ve just started driving C1 while I wait for my training, I’ve no great desire to start with C’s but will go with whatever my trainer offers.
I hope it happens this year!
