1. #1
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Dravosburg, Pa
    Posts
    10

    Question REAR MOUNT PUMPS for a RESCUE PUMPER

    Brothers i need some of your opinions! Yes I know I asked for opinions and I'm gonna get them.

    I need to know any pros or cons you may know of or have found having a rear mount pump on your truck?

    We just started a truck committee and i have heard talk from other departments concerning them but i figured i would get more information here.

    I think we would be looking at a rescue pumper or a heavy rescue.
    Living today to Protect Tommorow!

  2. #2
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Saginaw, Tx
    Posts
    81

    Default

    I have long thought that rear mounted pumps make good sense especially on rescue pumpers as they can take up less space leaving more room for rescue equipment. Several cities in the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex have placed rear mounted pumpers of various designs into service including Fort Worth (General Safety), Hurst (Central States), Plano is supposedly ordering a few, but I cannot remember by whom.

    One of the big complaints I get when I mention it where I work is that rear mounted pump puts the engineer in danger on accident scenes. My answer to that is the pump panel does not have to be on the rear of the apparatus. I would put it on the side. You will also probably get the "What if we are rear-ended by another vehicle?" question. I would come back with "What if we get T-Boned?"

    My best advice is to go the the trade shows and see what is being built. Good luck.

  3. #3
    Forum Member
    Fire304's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    At the Helm
    Posts
    1,174

    Default

    All of my experiance has been with traditional left side or cross mount pumps. Our new Saulsbury rescue pumper is a left side traditional pump panel. If it were my call I would have gone rear mount pump panel with electric controls (which allows you to actually place the pump anywhere).

    Here's why... we get a lot of interstate calls (car fires, roll-overs, etc) and with a side mount pump you frequently find yourself watching your back more than the incident for fear of being run over. With a rearmount pump and rear facing panel you are still in danger of being hit, but at least they would have to plow into the pumper to get you. Also, a rear mount will allow you to work both sides of the truck and the pump operator could still see the incident without having to walk around the truck.

    Despite the advantages I dislike top mounts because it puts you out of touch with the pump. Of course the top mount also eats up a ton of body space which is already at a premium in a rescue pumper.

    Downsides... its a long way to the cab should you need to get back there (damn, forgot to put it in gear). Also being behind the wheels exposes the pump to a lot of road grime and salt from the tires (major consideration here in NE). I do not know of any FD's up my way which use rear mounts, not sure if that's because of tradition or for practical concerns. I do believe its worth looking into and if I get on the new truck committee you can bet I'll bring it up!

    Hope this helps...

  4. #4
    Forum Member
    TCFD12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    238

    Default

    We were originally going to go rear mount on our 2 new engine/rescues, but decided against it for the following reasons. First, we wer looking at a Saulsbury Stealth series mid-engine/rear pump, the problem for us was that the only motor that was available was a Cummins, we wanted a Detriot. Now I'm not here to start a motor debate, so lets not go there. Plus we were limited to the HP ratings. The second thing that we didn't like was the fact that the pump was a PTO driven pump and not a t-case driven pump. Once again, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with a PTO pump, just that isn't what we prefered. There are a few other manufacturers that also do rear pumps, so look around and see what is out there.

    I actually like the concept of the rear pump, one of the nice things is that it basically forces the first due engine to pull past a fire scene and leave room for the truck behind it. Phoenix Arizona has gone to almost all rear mounted pumps with mid engines, go here for more info
    "The hero is commonly the simplest and obscurest of men."
    -Henry David Thoreau

    Visit my dept. at www.TCFD.com

  5. #5
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 1999
    Location
    North East Wi. USA
    Posts
    264

    Default

    We have a rearmount pump and so far we think its great. Shorter wheel base and more compartments. Our panel is in the drivers side rear compartment. Our pump is T-case driven due to its size.

    SBLG

  6. #6
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    89

    Default

    Archer 131, the engine I work from has a rear mount pump. I have used it for several years and I believe its not as efficient as a midship mount. Granted the problems/solutions vary due to design and manufacture. If you are looking to trade pump space for compartmetation I think you might be interested in the Hale Q-Pak Pump. The pump is limited to 1000 gpm and is midship mounted but it frees up considerable area.

  7. #7
    Forum Member
    Box2565's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Edgewood, Kentucky
    Posts
    723

    Arrow Rear Mount Pumper Photos

    If you visit the Rescue-Net web site, there are a couple of pictures posted of East Lake, Florida's rear mount pump rescue/pumper. Scroll down to 12-10-01 to find the posts. You can go directly to the Photo Post section on this link. Also, on 12-19-01 there is a photo of Madeira Beach, Florida's Saulsbury rig.

    Both departments were pleased with the set up of these rigs when I took the photos last year.

    Good luck!

  8. #8
    Forum Member
    TCFD12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    238

    Default

    SBLG, Is your motor midship mounted??? I did not think that it was possible to get a rear pump T-case driven. Not questioning you, just curious to know how it was done. We are dealing with the same company that built your truck and I was under the impression that it was not an option.

    How does the pump driveshaft get over the rear axle???

    Thanks for the info.
    "The hero is commonly the simplest and obscurest of men."
    -Henry David Thoreau

    Visit my dept. at www.TCFD.com

  9. #9
    Forum Member
    colfireman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    BC. Canada
    Posts
    94

    Default

    Hello there we have had a rear mounted pumper for 7 years now and we are very please with it.In terms of Engine and other specs go to our site and view for yourself http://www.city.colwood.bc.ca/depart...fire/index.asp
    If you go to Rescue-Net you can go to 12-10-01 Engine 51 to view the rear of the truck.Wheel base is 161 inches.
    The pump panel is on the drivers side rear with discharges out the rear.The company who manufactured the Engine is no longer in business however after we purchased ours Superior Emergency Vehicles out of Red Deer Alberta has made a few.They sent there engineers out to go over our truck.Superior is an affiliate of E-one.If you need more info just post or e-mail me.
    Last edited by colfireman; 06-21-2002 at 10:51 PM.

  10. #10
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 1999
    Location
    North East Wi. USA
    Posts
    264

    Default

    TCFD12

    Ours is a conventional engine foreward Spartan Gladiator. The pump is a RME driven through a RGA gearbox. Drive line runs over the axles. THe RME due to its size sits higher on the frame rails then a PTO driven version of this set up. I dont know if you can run the pump split shaft with the mid-engine units but I could ask if you like. MAy be a length problem ( not enough room for a tx case )

    SBLG

  11. #11
    Forum Member
    TCFD12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    238

    Default

    SBLG,

    Thanks for the response. We ended up going with a standard set-up side mount pumper. I kind of wished I had this info about a year ago.
    "The hero is commonly the simplest and obscurest of men."
    -Henry David Thoreau

    Visit my dept. at www.TCFD.com

  12. #12
    Forum Member
    colfireman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    BC. Canada
    Posts
    94

    Default

    More Info.Just spoke to our mechanic and our Engine is a Detroit series 60 430hp. Rme hale pump sounds about right as well.1500 Imperial gallons per minute. the transfer case is reversed to make our run.its mounted on a sparton Gladiater MFD.

  13. #13
    Forum Member
    Box2565's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Edgewood, Kentucky
    Posts
    723

    Arrow Kirksville, Missouri

    Here is a link to Precision Fire Apparatus showing a couple of photos of a rear mount engine that they constructed.

  14. #14
    Forum Member
    Box2565's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Edgewood, Kentucky
    Posts
    723

    Cool Margaretta Twp Ohio

    If I had been paying attention I would have noticed the other rear mount on the page!

    Anyway, here is Maragaretta Township, Ohio!

  15. #15
    Forum Member
    Box2565's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Edgewood, Kentucky
    Posts
    723

    Cool Ralston, Nebraska

    O.K., just to prove I wasn't paying attention, here is the 3rd rear mount in the Precision new deliveries section!

    Ralston, Nebraska

  16. #16
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Archer,
    No direct rear mount experience - just side and top mounts and I'll stick with the side mount thank you. Someone else mentioned the Hale Q-Pak mid-ship. Boston has a couple E-One rigs with the Q-Pak, shortest wheelbase custom pumpers E-One ever built it's stated. If Boston can get a std pumper on such a short chassis, that should leave plenty of extra room for compartment space if you take the chassis out to more typical rescue-pumper/heavy rescue size. If 1000 gpm works for FDNY and Boston engines, seems like 1000 gpm on a rescue pumper/heavy rescue in most communities should do just fine.

  17. #17
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Saginaw, Tx
    Posts
    81

    Default

    I agree!! I feel like there will be a trend back to 1000 GPM pumps for attack and rescue/pumper type apparatus. You can do a lot with 1000 GPM if it applied correctly.

  18. #18
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Haddon Township,NJ
    Posts
    15

    Thumbs up

    I agree with the 1000 GPM theory. I get a kick out of companies that purchase 1750-2000 GPM pumps but dont have a hydrant in their local that can supply over 1200 GPM. Firefighters have a tendency to think that "bigger is better" but we all have to be realistic when specing a new piece of apparatus. Don't get me started!

  19. #19
    Forum Member
    Fire304's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    At the Helm
    Posts
    1,174

    Default

    I think the best one is the rural FD that puts the nice shiney new 2000GPM pumper at the scene and the 60's vintage 750GPM at the water hole, ahhh guys, this isn't gonna work!

  20. #20
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Berks County, PA
    Posts
    629

    Default

    On the rear-mount pump idea -

    There are two in our county, one of which belongs to a company we work with in some mutual aid situations (as a matter of fact, our ladder was the aerial support to their rear-mount engine on a working apartment fire on Saturday). They seem happy with it. They ended up giving up some hose bed space and access to preconnects isn't quite as good as on most standard mid-ship mounts, but they gained a lot of compartment space in the bargain. Theirs is a 4-Guys on an all-wheel drive commercial chassis (International, I think). Personally, balancing the pros and cons as I see them, I don't see the big advantage to this setup, but I don't really see a big disadvantage either.

    On 1,000 gpm pumps -

    I'm with you there, for the most part, Chief 15201. We have 1,000 gpm pumps on our squirt and our engine, and I can't tell you the last time (outside of a surround-and-drown on a barn or something) that they had to work at capacity outside of a training evolution. We did put a 1,500 gpm on our new 105' quad, but that's to support the possibility of flowing the aerial waterway at 1,000 gpm while simulaneouly using hand lines to protect exposures or similar operations. At the same time, one of our mutual aid companies has a 2,000 gpm engine, but it was spec'ed with the idea of long distance rural supply in mind (also carries 1,800 ft. of 5" and is piped with 5" discharges), and I've seen it used to supply two aerial master streams at once from a static source on a fireground (the barn scenario again, but for real) and to supply 5" lays of over 2,000 ft. from a dry hydrant, as the only supply for both interior and exposure operations simultaneously (other than tankers as emergency backups). In this case, it makes sense to me (unlike the 750 supplying the 2,000 - which is just downright silly).

  21. #21
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Haddon Township,NJ
    Posts
    15

    Smile

    Yes, Bob, I do agree with you about a 2000 gpm pumper possibly being used to supply 2 aerial master streams from a draft, or supplying 5 inch hose a great distance, in a rural setting, but what about the company that specs out this monster on wheels and uses it as a 1st out attack piece or has no drafting points in their local. It seems like overkill to me.

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Dalmatian90's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Posts
    3,120

    Default

    There is a simple rule to rural pumps: Bigger is better.

    2500 and 3000gpm pumps can be driven by the size engines we are putting in the trucks already.

    5" and 6" hose can deliver those volumes to the fireground.

    From draft, you're not limited by undersized water mains, small wells, or poor hydrant grids. You can always draft half your pump capacity if it's shallow creek...can't draft twice it no matter if it's the Mississippi.

    Let the water flow and don't get into the rut that all you can deliver is 1000gpm so that's the size pump you'll get.

    Urban areas with good hydrant grids, you're looking at multiple pumps with short lays to hydrants -- 1000gpm with 4" hose makes a lot more sense there than it does out in the country. A fire in the city? Set up an Engine and Ladder on each corner of the building and let loose 4000gpm on it. A fire in the country? You'll probably have only a single pump at draft, and if it only does a thousand gpm, guess what your maximum flow is. And you really need a good, wide drafting place if you're gonna fit four engines down there, and goodness help you if it's a narrow road to get there -- laying four supply lines down the same road would kinda make a lot of spaghetti.

    You've also got to consider the overall picture of where a department is headed. Buying a 2000gpm attack pumper with a 750gpm supply pumper isn't neccessarily a bad idea -- if you plan is to replace that supply pumper in a few years with a 2000gpm pump.

    What makes a great attack truck and what makes a great supply truck are different -- if you need a new attack truck now, might as well make it big enough to handle the future supply truck.

  23. #23
    Forum Member
    Fire304's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    At the Helm
    Posts
    1,174

    Exclamation New Thread

    I'm starting a new thread about 2000 GPM pump overkill so we can keep this thread for rear mount discussions.

  24. #24
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    157

    Default

    Archer131:

    Some benefits of rear mounts:

    -Potential for lower cost, less plumbing
    -More compartment and hosebed space
    -Shorter wheelbase
    -LDH intakes and discharges are right below bed
    -Rear intakes and discharges are free (no extra cost for extensive plumbing) and have virtually no friction loss (unlike those plumbed for midships that will never allow the rig to operate at capacity)
    -Better positioning options: engine pulls past structure so lines can be stretched off the back, leaving the front open for the aerial
    -Better panel location (get the panel in the right or left rear compartment): Panel is farther from engine (less noise), and has the best of both worlds in the argument between midship side mount or top mount panels: engineer is on the ground (like a side mount), out of the way of discharges/intakes (like a top mount), good view - particularly if rig is positioned past structure (like top), engineer is out of traffic - if panel is on right side (top), and it doesn't add several feet to the wheelbase like a top mount does.

    If you notice, most of the people who actually use rear mounts like them. While we use all side mounts now, our next rig(s) should be rear-mounts.

    Saulsbury probably has the most experience (in the U.S.) with rear-mounts, but you pretty much have your choice of manufacturers: Pierce, KME, Central States, Darley, Toyne, Ferrara and many others all build them.

    SBLG has a really nice rig, check it out if you get a chance (SBLG - I think I might have to stop by the next time I am travelling out your way).

    A little about pump selection (and I'll keep the rest to the other thread): If you buy a Hale RME 1,500gpm pump, you might as well buy the 3,000gpm, depending on your engine size (Hale says 300hp for 1,750gpm, 360hp for 2,000gpm, 400hp for 2,250, 430hp for 2,500gpm, and 500hp for 3,000gpm). They are all based around the 8FG.

    Drop me a line if you have any questions.

  25. #25
    Junior Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Dravosburg, Pa
    Posts
    10

    Default

    HFD_CLanger

    Those were some of the points that I was given as well from an undisclosed salesman. I appreciate the information and some of the ideas listed here. I have printed out the entire thread to use as a part of resource guide for when i finally reach an opinion. Again I appreciate the help you have all provided please keep any thought comming.
    Living today to Protect Tommorow!

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