Thread: Rear Mount CAFS

  1. #1
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    306

    Default Rear Mount CAFS

    Currently putting together specs on a short wheelbase (maximum OAL of 30')CAFS engine and would like input from anyone that is operating a rear mount with CAFS. Looking for input pro or con of the layout and operation of rear mount CAFS vs. midship CAFS. Our current engine is a rear engine rear pump Spartan/New Lexington.

  2. #2
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    498

    Default

    How would a rear mount with cafs be any different that a midmount? Cafs is CAFS, one will have a different visibility for the engineer. but I dont think the FF at the tip will notice the difference.

  3. #3
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bryn Athyn, Pa.
    Posts
    1,623

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ledebuhr1 View Post
    How would a rear mount with cafs be any different that a midmount? Cafs is CAFS, one will have a different visibility for the engineer. but I dont think the FF at the tip will notice the difference.
    The differences, and they could be significant depending on what unit is used, would be in the location and installation of the component parts. I would think that possibly the most affected would be the drive system and the compressor along with its associated plumbing.

  4. #4
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    498

    Default

    True, I guess I thougt he was asking about how cafs performs on a midmout verses a rear mount.
    i do believe that rear mount pumps are more expensive as they are a bit more complicated to do.

  5. #5
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    306

    Default

    I'm primarily looking for any specific issues or complications that folks have had with the rear mounted systems, such as component installation or specific changes that where required vs. going with a standard midship system.

  6. #6
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bryn Athyn, Pa.
    Posts
    1,623

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ejfeicht View Post
    I'm primarily looking for any specific issues or complications that folks have had with the rear mounted systems, such as component installation or specific changes that where required vs. going with a standard midship system.
    Usually we're pretty skeptical about talking to truck builders about a lot of things, but there's one case where I'd be talking to as many as possible. I know that Toyne has been doing quite a few rear mounts lately, but I don't know if any of them have been CAFS units. I'm sure many other builders have been doing rear mounts, too.

    Even more importantly, talk to the pump people. Gregg Geske at Waterous Co., Gary Handwerk and/or Dominic Colletti at Hale Fire Pump Co. are the people I'd be reaching out to. I don't know if Darley had gotten into rear mounts, and I don't know any names there. But they have a lot of experience with CAFS. The pump people can give you the pluses, minuses and pitfalls from a different and critically important perspective.

  7. #7
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 1999
    Location
    North East Wi. USA
    Posts
    261

    Default

    We run a pair of Rear mount CAFS units. Ours are pumper tankers with 2000 and 2250 gallon tanks. Overall this has worked well for us the units are set up to run off the front and back only with no mid mounted attack lines. We can also draft front or rear, front suction being limited to about 900 GPM due to the plumbing runs. Our older unit has a Hale pump with a Waterous (Back than Pneumax) CAFS system and the newer unit has a Waterous S-100. Both compressors are PTO driven.
    Our area is predominantly rural with many very large homes down limited access roads; mutual aid can only come from one direction and can be limited. We tried to design our units to stand alone for extended time periods and be equipped with adequate resources that would limit the amount of gear that maybe required to be hand carried down a long access road.
    Our units are both on Spartan cabs Ė One a LFD the other a MFD. For us the rear mount pump gave us lots of compartment space large tanks and short wheel bases.

  8. #8
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    7

    Default

    The City of Fort Worth has several Rosenbauer rear-mount pump/CAFS units in service.

    rp

  9. #9
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    498

    Default

    SBLGFD,

    With 2250gal of water and CAFS, how often do you run out of water at a typical structure fire? Assuming your using CAFS.

  10. #10
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    13

    Default

    like someone said cost might be an issue, a department next door to us has an E-One with a CAFS rearmount, rescue compartments with a lot of storage space, definatly 30 feet OAL or under. Only 2 downfalls its an E-One and has had a bunch of problems, and second was the rig cost in the ballpark of 800K dont quote me.

  11. #11
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Rural Iowa
    Posts
    3,106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ledebuhr1 View Post
    SBLGFD,

    With 2250gal of water and CAFS, how often do you run out of water at a typical structure fire? Assuming your using CAFS.
    Water is for ISO points and for mutual aid. CAFS is for putting fires out without flooding the scene.

    3000gal w/CAFS here.

  12. #12
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    450

    Default

    As mentioned, Fort Worth has several rear mounts with CAFS. They are longer then 30' but you could easily accomplish a similar package 30' long. With a 2010 truck things may get a little more complicated though, I'm being told we will lose compartment space to emission equipment. Talk to the people that have built these trucks before and I'm sure they can address your concerns.

  13. #13
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 1999
    Location
    North East Wi. USA
    Posts
    261

    Default

    We donít run out of water on the primary rig very often but when we do we can draft or relay into the first due while flowing so there should be no interruption in flow.
    - Yes water helps with ISO but a larger tank on the initial attack down a limited access is sure nice to have.
    First due units are chased by tankers with additional mutual aid on the way

  14. #14
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,870

    Default

    I'll be the third to mention Fort Worth FD. I spoke to the Capt.(Homer Robertson?) in charge of the fleet when we were speccing our rear mount. He has a significant amount of knowledge on the subject.

  15. #15
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    306

    Default

    After evaluating our options we finally ended up going with a midship mounted pump and CAFS unit which gave us more flexibility in our design. We however placed the pump panel on the officer's (curb side) of the apparatus. Our current rear mount engine has the panel on the officer's side and the guys are comfortable operating in that position.

  16. #16
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    British Columbia
    Posts
    450

    Default

    Where's the flexibility? Just curious because you already have a rear mount.

  17. #17
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,870

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ejfeicht View Post
    Our current rear mount engine has the panel on the officer's side and the guys are comfortable operating in that position.
    This is how our new rearmount is and if we could change one thing, it would be to put the panel on the driver's side. This was clearly our design decision and we found we failed to account for a two issues:

    First, with the panel on the officers side, the exhaust must be vertical or moved to the drivers side, screwing up connection to existing station exhaust systems.

    Second, when we don't take the lane or street by angling the truck, such as on EMS back-ups or BS still runs, the operator is standing either on the curb, between the curb and the truck or worse yet in constant transition making it a potential trip backwards hazard.

    Other than that we're extremely happy with the rearmount design.

  18. #18
    Forum Member
    Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Our neighbors have a RM Cafs and are very happy with it.Try contacting Chief Adrian Morin at Waterford Maine FD.They've had theirs going on two years now,no issues I'm aware of. T.C.

  19. #19
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    306

    Default

    We where able to stay at the same OAL (31') as out current rear mount unit but where able to add a full CAFS system, increase our booster tank from 750 to 1000 gallons, increase the size of the cab, internally store our ladders and suction tubes and increase the amount of compartment space. With the rear mount due to the size of the CAFS unit it would limit our options on the overall layout of the unit.

  20. #20
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bryn Athyn, Pa.
    Posts
    1,623

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ejfeicht View Post
    After evaluating our options we finally ended up going with a midship mounted pump and CAFS unit which gave us more flexibility in our design. We however placed the pump panel on the officer's (curb side) of the apparatus. Our current rear mount engine has the panel on the officer's side and the guys are comfortable operating in that position.
    I'm aware of a department in Maryland that bought two engines and paid extra to have their pump panels put on the right side. After a few years they paid more money to have them moved to the left side.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Rear mount on tandem rear
    By fireinfo10 in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 05-22-2008, 02:18 PM
  2. Mid-mount versus rear mount
    By ChiefErickson in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 10-31-2007, 03:49 PM
  3. Top Mount vs. Rear Mount Rescue Pumper
    By Asst48 in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-15-2004, 01:24 AM
  4. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-22-2003, 04:01 PM
  5. Tiller or Rear Mount???
    By Inferno in forum Apparatus Innovation
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 01-10-2000, 02:48 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register