Peter, I can understand why training companies use W&D. Two vehicles for the price of one is an obvious attraction but how many of these lads will end up driving W&D? And now that the vast majority of agency drivers or blokes looking for a start with a bigger company are required to have an assessment drive I can understand why they would struggle with that, seeing as they lack experience, are not familiar with the kit or how to drive them and to top it all they have the pressure of an assessment as well! You can teach them the principles of driving articulated vehicles with W&D but can you honestly claim that using them is the best preparation for newbies in their quest to become class1 drivers in todays world?
My comments are aimed at training companies in general, not you specifically Peter.
This was so nicely put that it deserves a proper reply. I’ll try to answer each point in turn although it has to be said I’ve done this many times. So here goes again!
Yes, 2 vehicles for the price of one. Very true that this does keep the already steep running costs down. This has a couple of benefits for the candidate: lower rates than would otherwise have to be charged and, generally, much newer vehicles to train on.
How many will end up driving W&D? Who knows? W&D is becoming more common on UK roads but I will accept that the majority of “artics” are “proper” artics. (I think you know what I mean!)
The pre-employment assessment drive. Yes, it’s horrific. Regardless of what you trained on, be sure that the vehicle you’re presented with will be different. Gearboxes, or lack of, are possibly the biggest thing next to the difference between w&d and artic. But it is a fact, and I’ve proved this over many many years, that a person trained well on a w&d will be fine with an artic. Not as tidy as someone familiar with artic - but safe. And that’s the main thing. They are just as used to the length. Coupling/uncoupling is different - as we know. But the only difference is on the actual coupling. The proceedures are the same (the order of events). Let’s remember that not all artics couple the same. Some need split coupling, there are different types of safety catch, some training vehicles still have cable trailer park brake. So there’s plenty of other stuff to worry about.
A visit to a truckstop during training soon sorts out the coupling difference. Many of our candidates go for these assessments and end up with the job so it can’t be all wrong.
I do not claim (never have done - never will do) that this training is
the best preparation for newbies in their quest to become class1 drivers in todays world?
The hard fact, IMHO, is that no matter what configuration is used for licence acquisision, no driver is 100% prepared for the world that awaits them. Until folk realise that so much of this job is learned “on the job” this will always be an issue. It’s our job, as reputable trainers, to prepare the candidate in all respects to the best of our ability.
The fact is that new drivers have a lower accident rate than experienced drivers. They cause few problems when they start work as they don’t bring baggage with them. I know of more than one transport manager who favour newbies. And yes, they do pay them the same. The reasoning is that the job takes a bit longer to do, there are issues with routing and loading but the level of care is greater. Overall, the newbie can sometimes be favoured over an experienced driver. I know this isn’t what experienced drivers want to hear. Sorry about that.
As always, I wish everyone training and preparing for tests, the very best of luck. Pete 
