elmet training:
I have never understood why the trucks GVW isn’t declared when naming a test.
Peter
Weight limits on test routes.
Weight limits on test routes.
Yes I can see what you mean. But it’s not a big issue IMO.
Pete 
Hi i currently work as a shunter although i have no hgv licence just a shunter ticket, so im speaking from an inexperinced position really, but from my experince a loaded trailer is a completly different machine the way it handles and the different use of gears that are required, its sumthing that only stands to sence to intruduce, however if it pushes up the price of training and most likly the test fee also, surly there will be a drop in people wanting to do there hgv test, its sumthing i would love to do at this stage i can pretty much reverse a trailer anywhere, but the price of training as it is,its the only yhing thats really stopping me at the min, and i would imigine alot of others to.
Hi i currently work as a shunter although i have no hgv licence just a shunter ticket, so im speaking from an inexperinced position really, but from my experince a loaded trailer is a completly different machine the way it handles and the different use of gears that are required, its sumthing that only stands to sence to intruduce, however if it pushes up the price of training and most likly the test fee also, surly there will be a drop in people wanting to do there hgv test, its sumthing i would love to do at this stage i can pretty much reverse a trailer anywhere, but the price of training as it is,its the only yhing thats really stopping me at the min, and i would imigine alot of others to.
You’re quite right. Different gears are needed with a load. But the gear choice will vary between trucks regardless of whether or not they are loaded. eg a more powerful truck in good nick will be able to hold a higher gear longer than a tired, underpowered wagon. But loading it clearly changes the picture again.
So far as the increase in training costs, I cant see that it will be massive. In truth it will probably be barely noticeable. The reason for this is that there is a pathalogical fear amongst trainers that if they increase prices, nobody will book with them. End result it a bunch of knackered old lorries being run around in varying states of decay. Personally I’ve always run the business on a commercial footing that allows us to run the fleet we do. And yes, we do charge more than some. And less than others.
All the best, Pete
Been informed today that the DSA still haven’t decided what weight to be carried by test vehicles and are looking at the sensible option (in my opinion)of having a ratio per truck depending on the gross weight of the vehicle.
elmet training:
Been informed today that the DSA still haven’t decided what weight to be carried by test vehicles and are looking at the sensible option (in my opinion)of having a ratio per truck depending on the gross weight of the vehicle.
To be honest that doesn’t suprise me - if we are relying on the DSA to make a positive decision 
it could be a long drawn out affair 
chevmac:
elmet training:
Been informed today that the DSA still haven’t decided what weight to be carried by test vehicles and are looking at the sensible option (in my opinion)of having a ratio per truck depending on the gross weight of the vehicle.To be honest that doesn’t suprise me - if we are relying on the DSA to make a positive decision
You mean like the 8+ years it has been so far ?
ROG:
chevmac:
elmet training:
Been informed today that the DSA still haven’t decided what weight to be carried by test vehicles and are looking at the sensible option (in my opinion)of having a ratio per truck depending on the gross weight of the vehicle.To be honest that doesn’t suprise me - if we are relying on the DSA to make a positive decision
You mean like the 8+ years it has been so far ?
You said it
Led to believe not happening this year.
elmet training:
Led to believe not happening this year.
I would like to know where you are getting your info from?
I am led to believe that this is a done deal and the weights stated by Peter are correct.
The legislation states that the vehicle presented for test has to be a minimum weight which is 10t for a rigid I think. Using ibc’s is the cheapest solution for everbody to comply with the legislation.
burnie1:
elmet training:
Led to believe not happening this year.I would like to know where you are getting your info from?
I am led to believe that this is a done deal and the weights stated by Peter are correct.
The legislation states that the vehicle presented for test has to be a minimum weight which is 10t for a rigid I think. Using ibc’s is the cheapest solution for everbody to comply with the legislation.
If you can find a link to that legislation then I will believe you
For now I will believe the DSA proposal that has been there for nearly ten years
burnie1:
elmet training:
Led to believe not happening this year.The legislation states that the vehicle presented for test has to be a minimum weight which is 10t for a rigid I think. Using ibc’s is the cheapest solution for everbody to comply with the legislation.
Like Peter quite rightly said the GVW has been scrapped as it would be a nightmare to police due to the variety of training vehicles presented - therefore the 10t min will no longer apply ( if it happens )
John
Where’s the offical legislation burnie?
My info is from Technical Standards, DSA. They make/implement the rules so they’re worth listening to IME.
Pete
It pays to keep up with the current changes - it’s so easy for people to be giving out incorrect information - which obviously doesn’t help anyone 
John
ROG:
burnie1:
elmet training:
Led to believe not happening this year.I would like to know where you are getting your info from?
I am led to believe that this is a done deal and the weights stated by Peter are correct.
The legislation states that the vehicle presented for test has to be a minimum weight which is 10t for a rigid I think. Using ibc’s is the cheapest solution for everbody to comply with the legislation.
If you can find a link to that legislation then I will believe you
For now I will believe the DSA proposal that has been there for nearly ten years
Rog
I do not really know what you are going on about. The legislation is set out in one of the directives and probably has to be implemented by the end of September.
burnie1:
ROG:
burnie1:
elmet training:
Led to believe not happening this year.I would like to know where you are getting your info from?
I am led to believe that this is a done deal and the weights stated by Peter are correct.
The legislation states that the vehicle presented for test has to be a minimum weight which is 10t for a rigid I think. Using ibc’s is the cheapest solution for everbody to comply with the legislation.
If you can find a link to that legislation then I will believe you
For now I will believe the DSA proposal that has been there for nearly ten years
Rog
I do not really know what you are going on about. The legislation is set out in one of the directives and probably has to be implemented by the end of September.
Unfortunately burnie1 the information(legislation) you are quoting has had a number of changes to make it workable, and as far as i know still isn’t set in stone - sorry but “it is set out in one of the directives and probably has to be implemented by the end of september” doesn’t really give a definative answer as to what is " actually " going to happen.
chevmac:
burnie1:
elmet training:
Led to believe not happening this year.The legislation states that the vehicle presented for test has to be a minimum weight which is 10t for a rigid I think. Using ibc’s is the cheapest solution for everbody to comply with the legislation.
Like Peter quite rightly said the GVW has been scrapped as it would be a nightmare to police due to the variety of training vehicles presented - therefore the 10t min will no longer apply ( if it happens
John
John
The legislation states that a Cat c vehicle presented to test will have to be at least 10 tonnes (this may not be the right weight without checking) so how can this be Acheived? I sat on a consultation committee with the dsa with Walter Ritchie from Ritchies Training many years ago and we went through all the possible solutions. One suggestion was that the dsa had their own fleet of vehicles that the trainees would hire for their tests. Another was to have weight bridges at each test centre.
It was decided that the use of 1000 litre ibc’s would make it easy for the examiner to see how much load was on the vehicle. By putting 5 full ibc’s on a minimum size test vehicle would mean that all vehicles presented to test would comply with the directive.
chevmac:
burnie1:
ROG:
burnie1:
elmet training:
Led to believe not happening this year.I would like to know where you are getting your info from?
I am led to believe that this is a done deal and the weights stated by Peter are correct.
The legislation states that the vehicle presented for test has to be a minimum weight which is 10t for a rigid I think. Using ibc’s is the cheapest solution for everbody to comply with the legislation.
If you can find a link to that legislation then I will believe you
For now I will believe the DSA proposal that has been there for nearly ten years
Rog
I do not really know what you are going on about. The legislation is set out in one of the directives and probably has to be implemented by the end of September.
Unfortunately burnie1 the information(legislation) you are quoting has had a number of changes to make it workable, and as far as i know still isn’t set in stone - sorry but “it is set out in one of the directives and probably has to be implemented by the end of september” doesn’t really give a definative answer as to what is " actually " going to happen.
John
As I have stated I sat on the original focus group for this specific topic and suggested the use of ibc’s which was adopted. I also sit on a focus group with the dsa with this very subject being on the agenda at our last meeting a couple of months ago.
As far as I am led to believe this has to happen this September but you have stated that someone has told it will not. Who is your source and are they a reliable one? Things can change and if they are then I would like to know as I am about to place a order for 180 ibc’s!
burnie1:
chevmac:
burnie1:
elmet training:
Led to believe not happening this year.The legislation states that the vehicle presented for test has to be a minimum weight which is 10t for a rigid I think. Using ibc’s is the cheapest solution for everbody to comply with the legislation.
Like Peter quite rightly said the GVW has been scrapped as it would be a nightmare to police due to the variety of training vehicles presented - therefore the 10t min will no longer apply ( if it happens
John
John
The legislation states that a Cat c vehicle presented to test will have to be at least 10 tonnes (this may not be the right weight without checking) so how can this be Acheived? I sat on a consultation committee with the dsa with Walter Ritchie from Ritchies Training many years ago and we went through all the possible solutions. One suggestion was that the dsa had their own fleet of vehicles that the trainees would hire for their tests. Another was to have weight bridges at each test centre.
It was decided that the use of 1000 litre ibc’s would make it easy for the examiner to see how much load was on the vehicle. By putting 5 full ibc’s on a minimum size test vehicle would mean that all vehicles presented to test would comply with the directive.
Like I said the 10t limit is not possible to police, therefore ALL cat C vehicles may need to have 5 x 1000ltr ibcs on board, so what happens when a training company has a training vehicle with an unladen weight of 8 tonnes?? surely they only need to have 2 ibcs to make up the minimum weight.
What we have to remember is that it still hasn’t been decided this will definately happen this year.