After the sustained use of the GAG (Górniczy Agregat Gaśniczy) engine at a Queensland coalmine, it has raised questions as to its effectiveness as a remote firefighting tool. All firefighting apparatus have advantages and limitations, however the deployment of any apparatus must be based on its likelihood to succeed and effectively extinguish the fire or bring it under control. A recent study conducted for ACARP by researchers at UNSW has highlighted that there is more to be learned about the GAG. As coalmines are mining at greater depths and fan pressures are much greater than they were when the GAG was introduced, deploying the GAG may be a total waste ofresources and may place operators at greater risk. When the GAG unit is positioned on the surface of the mine, the pressure it generates has to overcome buoyancy of the exhaust gases and the frictional resistance of the borehole and part of the mine circuit. Buoyancy in deeper holes can lead to the GAG pressure relief system opening, venting out the products to the atmosphere without delivering any product to the mine workings. Additionally, frictional resistance is a function of distance. Deeper holes will have a greater frictional resistance than shallow holes. Delivering sufficient products from the unit will be limited by the available pressure that has to overcome the buoyancy, and increased mine resistance thatconsumes any residual pressure. By documenting the limitations of this unit it will enable better decisions to combat a fire or spontaneous combustion event.