Thread: Rear Intake ?

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Eng47ine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    20

    Post Rear Intake ?

    How many of you have a rear intake on your engine and use it, and are there any pro's or con's that you can think of.
    Thanks, Nathan

  2. #2
    Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    37

    Default

    we have a rear intake on our truck, and we use it all the time. We don't use it too much for drafting purposes, but we do use it for our 4" inlet on the truck, since we are usually back long lanes in our area, and lay in. It tends to keep another line out of the area for the pump operator. We have two valves on this intake, one at the very rear with a bleeder screw on it so we can bleed off the air in the line, since everyone knows how much air is in a 4" line. and we also have an air operated valve at the pump control, so the operator can open and close it from there without getting off the truck and running around to open and shut it.

  3. #3
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Here and There
    Posts
    143

    Default

    We have 2 1/2" rear intakes on our engines and tankers. We will use them for filling, but not for supply on a fire scene. This is because they lead directly to the tank. If the pump were to die, we wouldn't be able to manifold through the piping, versus reattaching the supply line to one of the side intakes.

  4. #4
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Bristol, Pa
    Posts
    19

    Default

    We have a rear 5" intake / discharge on both of our engine co's. I believe it is fed by 2) 3 1/2" pipes when used as a discharge. Because our first due area is very urban, the rear intake is very convenient. You don't have to pinch the supply line around cars, signs, etc. If you are looking to put a rear intake on a new rig, think about the discharge option also.
    Last edited by ac52; 02-27-2002 at 03:54 PM.

  5. #5
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    631

    Default

    We purchased our first engine with a rear intake in 1996. All others will have one from now on. We operate in an unincorporated area with hydrants in about 30% of the area. The rest is supplied by tanker shuttle. The rear intake keeps the LDH out of the way when using hydrants and allows the fold-a-tanks to be set up to the rear on those narrow streets or long driveways allowing better access for the tankers.

    We had problems with maintaining a vacuum for draft when using the rear intake when we first received the unit. We found that the gasket used in the Storz fitting was the wrong one. It seems that there is one gasket used for pressure (hydrant) ops and one that can be used for either. A gasket change solved the problem.

  6. #6
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Baltimore County, Pikesville / Halethrope Maryland Areas USA
    Posts
    4

    Thumbs up Rear Intakes

    Our department has had rear intakes back to 1956 on a seagrave pumper we had. I agree with all the above mentioned good things about them. I would suggest that you run a vaccum pick up port towards the rear to help displace any air that will be in the extended large piping.There are some very nice electric valves being used today with very good results.My careear department has just ordered eight ALF Pumpers with five in. rear intakes.
    JB

  7. #7
    MembersZone Subscriber
    gefd901's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    141

    Default

    We have a 6" (actually has 5" piping running to the pump) inlet on the rear of our '97 Pierce. We keep a custom length of (about 15') flexible hard suction pre connected. Pull it from the hose bed, connect the suction strainer, and drop it in the dump tank. It greatly simplifies the operation.
    We had a slight problem when we first got it with getting the air out. Pierce came out and installed a secondary priming line just for the rear intake and everything works fine now.
    As previously mentioned, it is nice to set the dump tank behind the engine and out of the way.
    FWIW this Engine has been the cover shot on Pierce's commercial pumper brochure for the last 3 years and is featured on their web site on the commercial pumper page. You can't see the rear intake on the photos though.

  8. #8
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Almelund, MN
    Posts
    7

    Default

    The only down side of rear inlets is that you may not be able to flow at the pumps rate capacity do to the piping from the back to the pump.

  9. #9
    MembersZone Subscriber
    gefd901's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    141

    Default

    The only down side of rear inlets is that you may not be able to flow at the pumps rate capacity do to the piping from the back to the pump
    That's true, we have a 1250 GPM pump and we can get about 950 - 1000 GPM through the 5" piping in the rear intake.

  10. #10
    Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    City of Peshtigo, WI, Station 1
    Posts
    38

    Smile

    The Dept. I belong to will be recieving a new pumper in May or June, which if built to spec. should be capable of pumping a full 1500GPM through the rear intake. The plumbing is ging to go through the tank and utilize flex pipe, originaly it was spec.ed for only having so many 45deg. and 90deg. bends to attain the flow. It will be fun testing to see if it really can.

  11. #11
    Member

    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    City of Peshtigo, WI, Station 1
    Posts
    38

    Smile

    The Dept. I belong to will be recieving a new pumper in May or June, which if built to spec. should be capable of pumping a full 1500GPM through the rear intake. The plumbing is ging to go through the tank and utilize flex pipe, originaly it was spec.ed for only having so many 45deg. and 90deg. bends to attain the flow. It will be fun testing to see if it really can.

  12. #12
    Forum Member
    dragonfyre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Birdsboro, PA
    Posts
    967

    Default

    Our newest pumper has a rear intake and I've used it at two major fires including last Sunday's. I pumped with it as my supply for about 12 hours and had no problem. The best part is how you can keep the 5" out of the road by having it in-line with the truck.
    Steve Dragon
    FFII, Fire Instructor II, Fire Officer I, Fire Appartus Driver Operator Certified
    Volunteers are never "off duty".
    http://www.bufd7.org

  13. #13
    Forum Member
    HF&R_H28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    227

    Default

    My dept has no 5" intakes on the rear. our 1965 seagrave pumper has a 2 1/2" suction. our main pumper and one of our tankers has a 2 1/2" direct tank fill, which really cuts down fill time!

  14. #14
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Alberta
    Posts
    5

    Post

    Our next rural pumper is on the drawing board right now. The plan at the moment is for a midship type pump with intakes and discharges on all four sides for added versatility. Since we have no hydrants in the rural area, we must deliver all of the water via trucks. Some of the acreages we respond to have very tight driveways and limited space. Even though some of the ports may be less efficient than others, the speed of the hook-up and quicker attack may well make the difference. In our case it would be unlikely that maximum pump capability would ever be achieved since we could not deliver enough water fast enough to sustain it for more than a short duration. Thanks for the tips regarding air in the lines on the long piping runs. Countermeasures will definitely have to be incorporated into the design.

  15. #15
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Posts
    820

    Default

    Some thoughts:

    Benefits to rear intake:

    1) Intake hose, in particular LDH, is out of the way of officer, fire fighters and chauffeur.
    2) Narrow roads and driveways cause limited access to all sides of the rig except the rear.
    3) Rural areas requiring tanker shuttles also benefit from this design option.

    Issues that are a detraction:

    1) Greatly increased friction loss from source. Especially important when your at the "Big One" and need as much water as possible. Same problem when you spec that nifty intake/discharge from the same pipe option.
    2) To get that intake from the rear to the front requires space. That space has one place to come from, the back side of your compartments which will lessen their storage space. The axles, frame rails and other components can't be moved. Something has to give.
    3) Maintenance is further complicated with yet another MIV to maintain and repair.


    Just some thoughts. Be safe.

    Larry

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

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