Hi just got my dates for my LGV Class 2 four day training course for end of February next year .
From what I understand is that the first 3 days I will be paired up with another person for 9hrs then the fourth day is my test day which is only 2 1/2hrs
Just wandering what the training schedule could be like and what to expect.
Every school has it’s own methods. The only way you’ll get an accurate answer is to approach your trainer and ask for the detail.
All the best with it, Pete S 
With 2 to 1 training you are still learning when the other trainee is driving
With 2 to 1 training you are still learning when the other trainee is driving
The oldest discussion ever!!
But with 1:1 training you get 100% of the trainer’s attention and (if he’s a good instructor) will adapt the training to your needs. Which, imo, is better than watching someone else get it wrong.
Seriously, there is no right or wrong. It’s personal preference. (But 1:1 is best)
Pete S
I did loads of 2 to 1 and gave each trainee 100% when they were driving so I fail to see the difference
Pete S:
With 2 to 1 training you are still learning when the other trainee is driving
The oldest discussion ever!!
But with 1:1 training you get 100% of the trainer’s attention and (if he’s a good instructor) will adapt the training to your needs. Which, imo, is better than watching someone else get it wrong.
Seriously, there is no right or wrong. It’s personal preference. (But 1:1 is best)
Pete S
Quick question(s) Pete, how many years did you undertake Training on a 2-1 basis?
And for all those years (I presume) did you think that the 2-1 method was wrong?
Also genuinely I would like to think that the Trainer is more than capable of adapting to both Trainees when conducting Training on a 2-1 basis!
While I do agree that there is no definite right or wrong I think that 2-1 is more right than wrong and has been accepted industry standard since the inception of HGV Driver Training.
On a 2-1 ratio in my opinion the objectivity that the “non driver” is opened up to is without question the biggest benefit but there are many more benefits that this ratio brings.
Historically the only Driving Schools that offered 1-1 Training had either bought the wrong kind of Truck for Driver Training or did not have enough Trainees to operate on a 2-1 basis.
Alex
I did loads of 2 to 1 and gave each trainee 100% when they were driving so I fail to see the difference
Quick question(s) Pete, how many years did you undertake Training on a 2-1 basis?
And for all those years (I presume) did you think that the 2-1 method was wrong?
Also genuinely I would like to think that the Trainer is more than capable of adapting to both Trainees when conducting Training on a 2-1 basis!
While I do agree that there is no definite right or wrong I think that 2-1 is more right than wrong and has been accepted industry standard since the inception of HGV Driver Training.
On a 2-1 ratio in my opinion the objectivity that the “non driver” is opened up to is without question the biggest benefit but there are many more benefits that this ratio brings.
Historically the only Driving Schools that offered 1-1 Training had either bought the wrong kind of Truck for Driver Training or did not have enough Trainees to operate on a 2-1 basis.
Alex
My word! I thought that a little light hearted banter would be welcome in these stressful times. Clearly I was wrong.
Keep taking the tablets.
Pete S
Pete, apologies I failed to recognise “light hearted banter” however my questions still stand and I would appreciate it if you would answer.
I will take the “taking the tablets” remark as light hearted banter.
Alex
im of the assumption that 2 to 1 or 1 to 1 wouldnt matter much if you had a naff instructor. i would consider the 2 to 1 if the price is reduced. but then i dont feel that great about watching someone else and then have them watch me. i think that 1 to 1 would be best for me. i hope i manage to find a decent instructor.
I would appreciate it if you would answer.
Quick question(s) Pete, how many years did you undertake Training on a 2-1 basis?
And for all those years (I presume) did you think that the 2-1 method was wrong?
Also genuinely I would like to think that the Trainer is more than capable of adapting to both Trainees when conducting Training on a 2-1 basis!
While I do agree that there is no definite right or wrong I think that 2-1 is more right than wrong and has been accepted industry standard since the inception of HGV Driver Training.
On a 2-1 ratio in my opinion the objectivity that the “non driver” is opened up to is without question the biggest benefit but there are many more benefits that this ratio brings.
Historically the only Driving Schools that offered 1-1 Training had either bought the wrong kind of Truck for Driver Training or did not have enough Trainees to operate on a 2-1 basis.
Ok, here goes!
I worked as an instructor for other trainers from 1974 to 1985 mainly on trucks but with a smattering of coach and bus training. And, for 3 years before that, instructing on bus and coach. Most of this was 2:1, some 1:1 and anything up to 6 at a time on a bus. More than capable of teaching within any of these disciplines but my experience leads me towards favouring 1:1. I have never said that 2:1 is wrong and, as you point out, it is the traditional method of training. In fact, some of my peers took the Mick when I set up on my own offering only 1:1 forecasting that it would never take off and would certainly not be financially viable. They were a bit wrong on both counts. You may recall that, in 1985, 1:1 training was virtually unheard of.
I agree that there have probably been cases where a school vehicle has not been suitable for 2:1 and this has forced the trainer’s hand into 1:1. The majority of PSTT vehicles are equipped for 2:1 which is easy when they are replaced with brand new vehicles on a regular basis. I’ve never been in the “did not enough Trainees to operate on a 2-1 basis” camp. Thankfully.
Occasionally, I have done 2:1. But I prefer this to be when the costs are being met from a single source eg a company has 2 drivers. My thinking is that if driver 1 is not so clever as driver 2, it’s fine for driver 1 to have a little more than 50% of the allotted time as this will enhance the chances of both passing. I’ve had the same with married couples and also with siblings or best mates. But it’s not fair to do this Iwhen the individuals are footing their own bill. So the instructor’s choice is to either be slightly unfair or reduce the chances for one of the candidates. An invidious situation.
I also have experience of a trainee really struggling with the reverse whilst his partner has cracked it no problem. So you either deprive the first one of reversing practice he needs or keep the more competent one hanging around in the hope the other driver sorts out the reverse. Not a happy situation. I accept this isn’t common - but it happens. And the number of folks that have come through my door for 1:1 because they have not had a good experience with 2:1 demonstrates that this is a valid argument. BUT, if the candidates are reasonably evenly matched, then of course it can work extremely well - possibly better than 1:1.
But we agree that there is no right or wrong. It’s up to the candidate to decide how they wish to spend their time and money.
Time for me to take my tablets!!
Pete S
Pete S:
I would appreciate it if you would answer.
Quick question(s) Pete, how many years did you undertake Training on a 2-1 basis?
And for all those years (I presume) did you think that the 2-1 method was wrong?
Also genuinely I would like to think that the Trainer is more than capable of adapting to both Trainees when conducting Training on a 2-1 basis!
While I do agree that there is no definite right or wrong I think that 2-1 is more right than wrong and has been accepted industry standard since the inception of HGV Driver Training.
On a 2-1 ratio in my opinion the objectivity that the “non driver” is opened up to is without question the biggest benefit but there are many more benefits that this ratio brings.
Historically the only Driving Schools that offered 1-1 Training had either bought the wrong kind of Truck for Driver Training or did not have enough Trainees to operate on a 2-1 basis.
Ok, here goes!
I worked as an instructor for other trainers from 1974 to 1985 mainly on trucks but with a smattering of coach and bus training. And, for 3 years before that, instructing on bus and coach. Most of this was 2:1, some 1:1 and anything up to 6 at a time on a bus. More than capable of teaching within any of these disciplines but my experience leads me towards favouring 1:1. I have never said that 2:1 is wrong and, as you point out, it is the traditional method of training. In fact, some of my peers took the Mick when I set up on my own offering only 1:1 forecasting that it would never take off and would certainly not be financially viable. They were a bit wrong on both counts. You may recall that, in 1985, 1:1 training was virtually unheard of.
I agree that there have probably been cases where a school vehicle has not been suitable for 2:1 and this has forced the trainer’s hand into 1:1. The majority of PSTT vehicles are equipped for 2:1 which is easy when they are replaced with brand new vehicles on a regular basis. I’ve never been in the “did not enough Trainees to operate on a 2-1 basis” camp. Thankfully.
Occasionally, I have done 2:1. But I prefer this to be when the costs are being met from a single source eg a company has 2 drivers. My thinking is that if driver 1 is not so clever as driver 2, it’s fine for driver 1 to have a little more than 50% of the allotted time as this will enhance the chances of both passing. I’ve had the same with married couples and also with siblings or best mates. But it’s not fair to do this Iwhen the individuals are footing their own bill. So the instructor’s choice is to either be slightly unfair or reduce the chances for one of the candidates. An invidious situation.
I also have experience of a trainee really struggling with the reverse whilst his partner has cracked it no problem. So you either deprive the first one of reversing practice he needs or keep the more competent one hanging around in the hope the other driver sorts out the reverse. Not a happy situation. I accept this isn’t common - but it happens. And the number of folks that have come through my door for 1:1 because they have not had a good experience with 2:1 demonstrates that this is a valid argument. BUT, if the candidates are reasonably evenly matched, then of course it can work extremely well - possibly better than 1:1.But we agree that there is no right or wrong. It’s up to the candidate to decide how they wish to spend their time and money.
Time for me to take my tablets!!
Pete S
Thanks for taking the time to answer Pete,
I concur with your first paragraph especially the number of Trainees often seen in buses! Also regarding the 1-1 ratio but would state that even as recently as 2005 this was still very rare by choice of the Driving School, it being more of a we don’t have two trainees this week so it’s 1-1. Regarding the financial viability I don’t see how there is any difference tbh.
Your second paragraph I am happy to hear that you have never been short of trainees.
The third paragraph has quite a bit of content that I would disagree with or suggest that there is a very straightforward workaround. A difference in abilities be it off road i.e. reversing excercise or otherwise can be easily accomodated on a time shared basis.
We indeed disagree as is our individual right but as you rightly say it is really up to the trainee to hopefully do their homework prior to attending with any Driving School and the choice that they have due to people like you and I having different opinions gives them those choices.
I will end my reply with the fact that my Trainers have been badgering me as to when we will be allowed to return to a 2-1 training ratio as they genuinely feel it is tangible the difference that this makes although this might even be as simple as the actual area that the Driving Test is being conducted in and around.
I think I might try one of your tablets now.
Alex
Life would be boring if we agreed on everything!
Pete
I did a mix of 2 to 1 and 1 to 1 on both rigid and artic training.
I found the 2 to 1 very useful as it helped to watch another trainee getting things right / wrong and learning from them. For example when doing class 1 I had another driver who was actually a driving instructor coming in for training having just passed his class 2 but with no actual experience. I found that watching him doing the junctions and awkward bits where it’s different was really good and I learnt a lot.
He said to me that he felt I was far more competent as a driver and seemed so comfortable behind the wheel, I explained that most of the driving was little different to my normal job but I found that he was far better than me on the tricky bits as he wasn’t having to undo the rigid driver thinking.
We both found the experience useful
I am doing my training soon and I like the idea of 2:1. I think it always helps with the learning to watch someone else do something and have their mistakes corrected because you can apply them to yourself.
However, I would be very happy though if I felt that I was deprived of the training I had paid for because the other driver was struggling. The way I see it is that I’m not just paying to pass an exam, I am paying for training and practice. Besides, even if I look like I’m doing alright, I could still have a bad day and fail which would be less likely if I had all the training I paid for. Therefore I think trainers need to be mindful of this.
The place I booked with does 2:1 and they have almost 100% 5 star reviews so I suspect everything will be ok.