Saving Lives & Protecting Property
Oh absolutely not. There’s going to be fights over this video. Is what you learned about exposure protection wrong? In the past, all of our textbooks have taught us to put water onto the actual exposures. We’re not taking away the problem. We want to take away the problem. All right. You ready?
His name is Sean Gray, and he literally co-wrote the book on applying FSRI research. The crew was visiting him in metro Atlanta to investigate four questions. One: what myths about exposure protection could be hurting your department? Is there a better strategy? What equipment choices can help you master your next exposure fire? Plus, what nuance is there in this debate? I think we can be better, faster, more efficient by using research-based tactics, matching our experience with the research—it just makes us better. That’s how we know we’re in Atlanta, baby.
Metro Atlanta area is very densely populated. Millions of people are here. Here in Cobb County, we have about 800,000 sleeping residents and over a million that come into the county during the day through our businesses, high rises, etc. Cobb County stretches 345 square miles and has 29 stations, plus big names like the Home Depot headquarters and the Atlanta Braves. That all adds up to roughly 60,000 calls a year.
Here’s the scenario we’re tackling today. So there’s a very first lesson that we’re going to show you guys—just talking about exposures and the risks when we have a large body of fire and what that risk of fire is to the exposure. This is a fire that is rare in comparison to the residential fires that we deal with. So, in this scenario, we want to make sure that the line is in place. There’s a safety issue. We have to remember that because it’s a large body of fire, and we are in a defensive operation mode, there’s not a hurry, there’s not a rush. We still want to be expedient. But at the same time, we want to make sure that we have everything set up and in place. Water supply—all of the pieces in play—before we get the nozzle going.
So let’s dive in with question one. Why is the old way wrong? In the past, we’ve seen that we would take the nozzles and we would put water onto the actual building that is not on fire. And today we’re going to see the opposite of that. We’re going to treat the actual fire building as the hazard, and we’re going to take away the fire so that it doesn’t create the exposure problem. Maybe wet down the exterior siding—we can do that real quick—but we’re not taking away the problem. We want to take away the problem. And taking away the problem is getting water onto the fire to actually do extinguishment.
Question two: what is a better way? Cobb County firefighters show us how they do it. Getting the ground monitor deployed, glancing building number two, and then ultimately hitting building one as hard as possible to put out the fire.
What did the FSRI studies say about this application? You start talking about the Fire Attack Study—we just show that it’s better to get water onto the base of the fire than it is to get the actual exposure. So yes, you want to try to wet the siding and maybe knock down any fire that might already be starting to catch the secondary building—the exposure building—on fire. But once we hit that exterior real quick, we’re going to turn our nozzle over to the actual building that is on fire and start to extinguish the fire to therefore take away the exposure threat.
There’s going to be a lot of opinions on this next question. What equipment wisdom does Captain Gray have? Blitzfire! It does come with three stacked tips, and a lot of people leave the stack tips on there. In the scenario that you saw just prior to this, we had it all the way down at the 1.5-inch tip. The reason for that is we know: big fire, big water. We flowed it at about 80 PSI—would be the tip pressure. That gives us just over 600 GPM and we’re trying to knock down that fire as quickly as possible in this sort of scenario—being a defensive operation. And we have a very good water source here in Cobb County.
We have great hydrants. We don’t really have—because of our dense population—we have a very good water system. So we don’t have any issues with that. Now, in more sparsely populated areas, they may not have a great water supply. You might have to go down to the 1-inch tip, 1¼, or hopefully you can get to the 1½. But big fire, big water is our goal.
Question four: are there any conditions that would change Captain Gray’s mind? What nuance is there in this debate? There are some serious exposure threats, right? Like the building—depending on what the building is made from, the type of building construction that it is, the type of society that it is. It could be vinyl siding with poly ISO straight foam underneath—and that’s like gasoline siding. It’s ready to go, right?
So we really want to try to take the heat off of that initially. And that’s why you’re going to see us kind of sweep. The way that it was looked at in the past is that the exposure is still an intact building. We’re trying to keep it from catching on fire. And so this one’s a loss. We’re going to write that one off. So just let it burn. And then we’re going to keep the exposure and try to protect the exposure.
That is a great idea. But at the same time, if you take away the heat maker that’s over here on the right side with big water, then it’s—you know—you’re doing two things. You’re extinguishing the fire, and then you’re also protecting the exposure by extinguishing the fire.
Did you disagree with something you heard in this episode? We would love to hear your opinion. And if you have an idea for an episode in your city, you can check out the Fully Involved homepage: tft.com/fully-involved.
In this episode of Fully Involved, we head to Cobb County, just outside Atlanta, to confront a widespread misconception in modern firefighting: how to properly protect exposures during defensive operations.
Want to know which portable monitor makes this kind of knockdown possible?
Captain Sean Gray, co-author of The Evolving Fireground, and his crew show us how to use research-based fireground strategies to rethink everything we’ve been taught about the most effective way to combat exposure fires.
For years, training materials have focused on spraying water directly onto exposure buildings to protect them from radiant heat and flame impingement. But that may be missing the real target.
“In the past, we were taught to put water on the exposures. But that’s not removing the problem.”
The source of the exposure threat remains active.
It delays effective fire suppression.
Instead, Captain Gray urges crews to attack the fire building itself, even in full defensive mode. By removing the “heat maker”, you’re not just protecting exposures—you’re eliminating the threat altogether.
Still using outdated methods for exposure protection?
Get the latest ground monitor tactics and gear breakdowns inside our free product guide.
If putting water directly on exposures isn’t the solution, what’s the better way?
Captain Sean Gray and the Cobb County crew demonstrate a more effective, research-backed approach: hit the fire hard and early with the right flow—and don’t rush into chaos without setting yourself up for success.
It’s a defensive operation – treat it as such, with structure and planning.
Don’t hurry at level 10 – urgency doesn’t mean recklessness.
Establish water supply first – don’t touch that nozzle until you have sustained flow.
Then deploy the nozzle – once the setup is solid, hit it hard and hit it right.
Download the Portable Monitor Guide to see exactly what makes this approach work.
Deploy the BlitzFire® ground monitor with precision.
Briefly cool the exposure building only if it’s actively heating.
Redirect full stream toward the fire building for rapid knockdown.
This isn’t just opinion—it’s based on the Fire Safety Research Institute’s (FSRI) fire attack studies, which prove that removing the heat source is the most effective form of exposure protection.
We want to take away the problem—not just cool down what might catch next. Extinguishment removes the threat.
Tactics mean nothing without the right tools—and Cobb County has made intentional equipment choices to support this aggressive approach.
Preferred tip: 1.5-inch
“Big fire, big water. That’s why we go straight to the 1.5-inch tip.”
In areas with limited water, departments might size down to 1¼-inch or 1-inch tips—but Cobb’s strong hydrant network allows for max output from the start.
Are there times when the old method still applies? Absolutely. This isn’t a one-size-fits-all solution.
Material composition: Foam-backed vinyl siding can act like gasoline.
Tight exposures: Homes within 10–15 feet require special attention.
Wind and weather: Shift radiant heat direction and exposure risks.
Limited water access: Rural or remote areas may need adaptive flow rates.
Not all firegrounds are created equal. From tight spacing to limited water, gear choices matter more than ever.
See which monitor fits your environment in our downloadable guide.
If you take away the heat source, you’re doing two things: extinguishing the fire AND protecting the exposures.
No one fights fires like your department. This is your chance to highlight your crew's aggressive tactics and unique responses.
Be the first to catch new episodes. Get updates straight to your inbox and never miss insights into regional firefighting tactics.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
