After getting class C is it better to get trained in a articulated tractor unit & trailer
Or with a wagon & drawbar trailer.
Because this could influence who I would select to be trained by.
This subject has been discussed in great depth. It’s well documented that I support the method of getting the licence via W+D as it is, without the slightest shadow of doubt, easier. But you should then have between 2 and 4 hours on an artic as they are different animals.
To learn on artic simply makes your life harder and I cant understand why anyone would want to do that.
Also bear in mind that, whilst most CE vehicles in the UK are artics, there is an increasing number of W+D out there. So doing it the way I suggest covers you no matter what you end up in.
Good luck with you training - regardless of which route you choose. Pete 
Mjdhehir:
After getting class C is it better to get trained in a articulated tractor unit & trailer
Or with a wagon & drawbar trailer.
Because this could influence who I would select to be trained by.
Peter, quite rightly will suggest W+D as he runs them, personally i think that arctics are better, I did not drive one W+D in my career in England, if any training school is good they will give a free assessment … Please think carefully and make sure you drive both and see wht you feel comfortable in … and any good driver should be able to drive both as I do not think a artic is harder to pass in than a W+D
Good luck with whoever you choose as pete says … just make sure it is right for you and do not use a broker!!!
I had this problem what to train on and did assesment on both found the artic more comfortable going forwards than w&d but had problems on reversing artic , but that could have been down to my trainer at the time (not very patient) as it was ended up failing first time on reverse and Peter then very kindly offered me some training on reverse W&D had it mastered in an hour and although failed second time on W&D wasnt down to reversing was taking too much room on turns as had been used to artic cornering and encroached on a car coming down the road the other way had a bit more practice in W&D and passed 3rd time with only 2 minors after getting myself a bit closer to the kerbs thats the main difference between the two a W&D follows you a bit better than artic dont need such wide turns ,
Thats my experience and I would suggest you take assesments in both to see what you find most comfortable and make sure you do reverse in both as well at the assesment then you will be able to make your decision better
good luck with whatever you decide and make sure the trainer you will be going with is good and patient as is dosent help when trying to train if instructor is putting you off , these things need to be considered as I found out to my peril 
jen x
A very common dilemma!!
My own thoughts on this subject are based on statistics.
In the UK, the commonest C+E combo is an artic, and I don’t think there’s much evidence to the contrary, even though the W+D has made numerical gains in the last couple of decades.
Now to the usefulness of the two types of C+E combos…
The big advantage of a W+D is that, once uncoupled, you still have a viable and useful Cat “C” truck, whereas an uncoupled artic tractor unit can’t be used to carry freight. I don’t think there’s much to dispute on that point.
It then follows that in the real world, both an LGV training school and a haulier will probably generate the most revenue from a W+D, because if you leave the trailer behind, you still have a Cat “C” vehicle. From that point of view, an artic is all or nothing for training or for the carriage of freight.
Now to the skill required…
IMHO and due to the pivot points, an artic requires more skill to drive than a centre axle W+D, but I guess this point can be argued.
However, I take my hat off to a driver who can accurately reverse an “A” frame drawbar W+D, because I’d say that requires more skill than that needed for an artic.
In a straight discussion involving artic Vs. centre-axle W+D, if a candidate learns and passes their test on an artic, the transition to centre-axle W+D is pretty straightforward. However, I reckon that if a candidate trains and passes on a W+D, the transition to artic is more problematic.
In terms of ‘what’s a candidate most likely to drive post-test?’ then DVLA registration statistics provide the answer. 
Of course, nothing is set in stone, so I’ve simply chucked a few ideas into the discussion.
You could of course go have an assessment with both & see how you feel in both
Talk to the instructors & get there opinions
I agree with going to get assessments on both W&D and Artic.
I was travelling along the M4 today and saw IRO 5 artics to 4 W&D. There is definitely a rise of W&D outfits recently.
Only you will know what you are more comfortable with by going out there and trying them out.
Good Luck
A Cat C driver with a good number of miles under their belt must feel more comfortable in W+D as it is virtually the same as what they drive all day, every day. Get used to the length and that’s really about it for going forwards. Reversing is easier, especially on the new, smaller DSA test area. Coupling/uncoupling is a tiny fraction more tricky than an artic.
I’m prepared to accept that a less experienced CAT C driver could take to artic as they are less ingrained into driving a large rigid vehicle.
It is an indisputable fact that it is easier to learn and pass on W+D. The transfer to artic is not hard - between 2 and 4 hours and remember there’s no test to pass at that point (already done!).
Artics are not that difficult - up till 1996 nearly everyone learned on an artic straight from car (some even without a car licence). But the normal training period was IRO 35 hours. Using W+D we frequently achieve both courses on a lesser combined time.
Anyone considering CE training would be well advised to try both and then decide. At the end of the day it’s personal choice.
Pete
Hi
My personal choice has been an Arctic. I felt that if i learnt it a full size Arctic, then id be more familier With it once offered work. As already stated, there are alot more arctics than W+D out there.
If your choose W+D to make life a little easier for your lessons, then when you get offered work in an arctic i think it would be very difficult. I’d imagine they respond completly differently to one another. It’ll be daungting enough with first arctic job if you learnt in one, let-alone if you didnt.
Best of luck, regardless Which you choose.
Ben
I’m going to go for artic.
I’m not sure how much you would end up needing to pay out for a couple of hours on an artic somewhere but i definitely the see the two sides.
Sam Millar:
I’m going to go for artic.I’m not sure how much you would end up needing to pay out for a couple of hours on an artic somewhere but i definitely the see the two sides.
I paid £175 for 4 hours. Well worth it
Hey,
Well I have asked the same question to my instructor, tho as my training company does Training on Artics, I am looking into doing maybe a few lessons on W+D just to get a bit of experience on it.
Gareth
I have this dilemma at the moment, I’ll be booking my C+E next week for march/april and my preferrred training school is Pete’s for several reasons, however, I have a shot at getting straight onto artics, within the Travis group if I train in an artic, the artic training is cheaper and fairly reliable (70% pass rate) locally, I just can’t help feeling I may have a better chance with Pete even though I’ll have to fork out another £200 for some familiarisation training, and of course I’ll be up to speed on wag & drags too.
thanks to all for your candid advice . i will let you know how i get on 
Peter Smythe:
This subject has been discussed in great depth. It’s well documented that I support the method of getting the licence via W+D as it is, without the slightest shadow of doubt, easier. But you should then have between 2 and 4 hours on an artic as they are different animals.To learn on artic simply makes your life harder and I cant understand why anyone would want to do that.
Also bear in mind that, whilst most CE vehicles in the UK are artics, there is an increasing number of W+D out there. So doing it the way I suggest covers you no matter what you end up in.
Good luck with you training - regardless of which route you choose. Pete
Are you for real 
oh and
So you think it’s ok to send people out on the road with a licence, but no experience in a vehicle that you describe as harder to drive 
You shouldn’t be allowed to teach people to push Corgi toys around their Mum’s kitchen 
Just a little reminder to all the newbies, those that can, DO, those that can’t, TEACH
newmercman:
Peter Smythe:
This subject has been discussed in great depth. It’s well documented that I support the method of getting the licence via W+D as it is, without the slightest shadow of doubt, easier. But you should then have between 2 and 4 hours on an artic as they are different animals.To learn on artic simply makes your life harder and I cant understand why anyone would want to do that.
Also bear in mind that, whilst most CE vehicles in the UK are artics, there is an increasing number of W+D out there. So doing it the way I suggest covers you no matter what you end up in.
Good luck with you training - regardless of which route you choose. Pete
Are you for real oh and
So you think it’s ok to send people out on the road with a licence, but no experience in a vehicle that you describe as harder to drive
You shouldn’t be allowed to teach people to push Corgi toys around their Mum’s kitchen
Just a little reminder to all the newbies, those that can, DO, those that can’t, TEACH
Yes, I am for real
No I don’t think it’s ok to send people out on the road with a licence, but no experience in a vehicle that I describe as harder to drive (but I have always said that artic training should follow W+D but you chose not to read that bit)
I was never any good with Corgi toys
Just a little reminder to all the newbies, that those that can do, AND teach. Having spent years tramping in artics around Europe - western and eastern, North Africa and USA, I have possibly skidded backwards in laybys more miles than some people who choose to post and make daft comments about my abilities
Suggest you read the post properly and get the facts straight before you start passing comment on my abilities.
Pete
Learn in a proper truck an Artic!!
Here’s a joke situation. My mate has his HGV which is for a wagon and drag, but not an artic. To get his artic licence he has to re-sit his test. He can do it in a wagon and drag which he is already licenced to drive. You couldn’t make it up…
DoYouMeanMe?:
Here’s a joke situation. My mate has his HGV which is for a wagon and drag, but not an artic. To get his artic licence he has to re-sit his test. He can do it in a wagon and drag which he is already licenced to drive. You couldn’t make it up…
He could also drive himself to the test, promptly fail it in a most spectacular fashion, and then legally drive himself home again.
For what its worth, I don’t agree with allowing the C+E to be taught or tested in a W+D combination. Yes, it is easier to learn and hence you stand a higher chance of passing the test. However the whole point of the test is to show that you have achieved a minimum standard of skill and competency, something that cannot be demonstrated when you gain the C+E entitelement on a drawbar rig. An artic is a different beast, which requires far greater awareness of what the 45ft of metal behind your head is doing, whereas a W+D combination can be driven comfortably with complete disregard for the fact that you even have a trailer coupled.
I also think the minumum vehicle requirements for tests are a complete joke too, as the number of trainees running around in overgrown 7.5 tonners with a ‘paper’ 12 ton rating is ridiculous, there is a big gap between an Iveco or Daf dinky van and a 26 ton 6x2 rear lift ‘truck’.
We won’t take newbies or low-experience drivers from a couple of local schools who go down the cheap-skate route of minimum size vehicles and W+D combinations, as we don’t believe they have the skills necessary for operating in our area of work, either on haulage or recovery work.
It has always been the case that a new driver is ill-equipped to deal with every vehicle presented to him. I was - and I learned on an artic. Training has never been carried out by driving schools on loaded vehicles and, until recently, a straight 5 or 6 speed gearbox with a flat body was the norm. So no-one knew anything about loading a truck or different gearboxes. How many times have experienced drivers said to me “it’s ok you teaching em in a 6 speed - what happens when they get an Eaton twin split etc etc” The answer is “exactly the same as what happened to you”. Because no-one is trained on every type of transmission with every type of load and every configuration of vehicle.
The majority accept that the initial driver training is what is says on the box. It will achieve the licence - it does not produce a finished driver and nor does it purport to. Employers are responsible for ensuring training is in place that is specific to the vehicles being driven, loads carried etc. I feel this is the biggest weakness in the system ie sign on with agency and then, without any induction, be given the keys to a truck.
The minimum test vehicle rules are total rubbish. Even when they bring in “loaded vehicles” soon, a CE will run at a princely 15 tonnes. What a waste of time. Should be at least 30 tonnes.
I also would love to see the drawbars banned from CE - believe it or not! I think more fuss is made of this than it actually warrants but there is a valid point and I have never argued this.
The rules are enforced by the Driving Standards Agency who conduct the tests. Customers come to us and trust us to train them to a comfortable standard to pass the test. I dont honestly believe that any newbie would expect to pass the test and feel 100% comfortable in any vehicle immediately afterwards. And neither was I!
I believe, and so do other established, reputable trainers, that the system needs a total rethink.
If, for instance, there was a minimum of 30 tonnes (or whatever) and a ban on drawbars, I would have absolutely no problem in buying some shiny new artics and putting them on training.
But God help the trainee who has to pay for all this.
So, in the meantime, we will continue to train drivers in the easiest, most economical, least stressfull way we know.
BTW, for over a year we ran a fully loaded 45’ box behind a DAF tractor unit and offered conversion training completely free of charge. Uptake was SIX people.!!! Tell me what I’m meant to do!!