CDL Required to Drive Class A?

garyhaupt wrote:
If a person is driving an air-brake equipped vehicle, there should be no question about getting an endorsement. If the driver has no idea how air brakes work nor how to check them or operate them properly/safely, they are an accident looking for a hill to happen on.

Gary Haupt

Technically PA doesn't require an endorsement. But if the vehicle you test on has air brakes you will be required to know about them.

"You must be able to visually inspect areas of the vehicle such as the tires, mirrors, lights, reflectors for anything unsafe and for major leaks. (Fluids, fuel, air, etc.). You will need to demonstrate you know how to use the vehicle controls, perform a straight line backing maneuver, and complete an airbrake check on the vehicle if the vehicle is equipped with air brakes."

Doesn't seem to be anything to stop you from taking the test on a non-air brake vehicle and then driving an equipped one once licensed. I could be wrong and it's just not stated that way in the link I provided.

JaxDad wrote:

otrfun wrote:
Agree that every driver of an RV should have the proper driver's license and all endorsements required by the state/province where they legally reside.

With that being said, I'd have to agree with Horsedoc, the odds of a "guy and his wife in a DP class A" driving without an air brake endorsement getting cited by an LEO while driving out-of-state in the US are virtually zero.

On the flipside, got to wonder what the odds are a Canadian LEO would cite an RV driver from the US (specifically Nevada) towing a 15k TT without a "J" endorsement?

Maybe my point is still unclear. An air “endorsement” is NOT a “license” and so it’s NOT covered by reciprocity. It is a form of “equipment regulation” which authorizes the holder to operate an air brake system. It is no different than axle weights or length. Being legal for 70’ in your home State does not mean 65’ States cannot stop you.

An endorsement is an amendment to one's license, to cover additional types of vehicles, and as such I can't see how it is not covered by reciprocity. It does not, of course, magically allow one to do things that are otherwise illegal (like exceed length limits or double-tow in places where that is forbidden), but assuming vehicles equipped with air brakes are legal to drive then being properly licensed in one's home state or province would be sufficient to drive such a vehicle anywhere.

Vermont does not have an air brake endorsement for a non-commercial driver's license. An ordinary, run-of-the-mill driver's license is all that is required to drive a DP with air brakes. (The only endorsement offered is for motorcycles.) If I were to buy an RV with air brakes, would it be impossible for me to legally drive it in your province because I don't have an endorsement that does not exist on my license?

JaxDad wrote:
Maybe my point is still unclear. An air “endorsement” is NOT a “license” and so it’s NOT covered by reciprocity. It is a form of “equipment regulation” which authorizes the holder to operate an air brake system. It is no different than axle weights or length. Being legal for 70’ in your home State does not mean 65’ States cannot stop you.

In this case, it’s not a citation issue. It’s a prohibition. If a LEO stopped you and you had no insurance the officer couldn’t just say “here’s your citation, be sure to drive carefully now.” They simply can’t turn a blind eye to it, especially these days.

I think you missed my point. There are many different kinds of "endorsements" (and "licenses", for that matter). Each locale or jurisdiction independently determines the civil penalty for any given infringement. Each locale or jurisdiction also independently determines how strictly they want to enforce a given endorsement and/or licensing requirement.

JaxDad wrote:


Doc, I think you missed my point. Air brakes are NOT a “license” issue and so not covered by reciprocity either. An air brake “endorsement” is a sort of qualification to operate air brake systems.

In fact I watched exactly that happen. Spot checks are very common in Canada on holiday weekends, aimed at getting unsafe **** off the road. A guy & his wife in a DP class A found out 1,000+ miles from home that he didn’t have the required air brake endorsement. Unfortunately LEO’s can’t just look the other way anymore when they discover a problem.

I haven't looked at Canadian provincial licensing regulations in years, but in the US, if you are properly licensed in your own state for the class of vehicle you're operating, you're good in all US states. Since not all states even issue an air brake endorsement for non-commercial vehicles, there's no way drivers from those states can be cited for not having one. NY State, for example, issues an 'R' endorsement that allows personal use "multi-purpose vehicles" (includes motorhomes) over 26,000 lbs to be driven with a standard Class D license, but no air brake specific endorsement. No other state can cite you for not having the specific class of license they use for that application. Canada and the US have had full drivers license reciprocity since at least 1943 when the "CONVENTION ON THE REGULATION OF INTER–AMERICAN AUTOMOTIVE TRAFFIC" took place resulting eventually in the "Foreign Reciprocity Resource Guide". There have been some modifications over the years due to technology changes, but the basic premise is still the same. License good in the US? Good in Canada and Mexico...

The Oklahoma Drivers Manual is certainly not clear. It only shows 4 types of license. Class A, B, and C commercial. And Class D non commercial. The class D says you can operate Cars, vans trucks under 26,001 lbs. (GVWR) recreational vehicles, fire trucks. That seems to say a class D will allow you to operate an RV without regard to weigh

That statement is simple enough to understand. It is plainly stated that a Class D allows the person to operate cars, vans and trucks under 26,001 lbs. and recreational vehicles and fire trucks without the weight requirement.

There are three categories of vehicles under 26,001 lbs. and two classes of vehicles over 26,001 lbs.covered with a Class D licensee.

It reads much as NC does in that recreational vehicles have an exception under the weight requirement and among other requirements.

I took the titles for my 39 ft. motorhome and my Jeep wrangler to the state licensee division. I presented them to the officer along with my driver licensee. I asked the officer if I could legally drive that motorhome while towing that Jeep with that licensee. The officer examined them and said I see no problem but let me check. The officer called headquarters and presented the information on my documents and was told that there was no problem with me operating the vehicles.

My driver licensee states: "Class: C-Any noncommercial single vehicle with a GVWR of less than 26,001 lbs. A vehicle towing a vehicle which has a combined GVWR of less than 26,001 lbs. operated by a driver 16 yrs. or older."

The kicker to that weight limitation is in the General Statutes of NC, Recreational vehicles are exempt.

Once a person is legal in their home state then they are legal in all the other states.

Well we haven’t had a good kick at the drivers license cat in a while....
Good work boys!

The North Carolina drivers handbook indicates that operating an RV over 26001 pounds requires a non- commercial class A or B license.

What I see here is the usual experts opining on things they know nothing about.