Hello Nickle69,
Broadly speaking the answer to your question is yes. But as I mentioned in previous posts, the area being tested is very confined and the data retrieved cannot be extrapolated over large distances, not yet anyway. However, all the principles from geochemistry, geophysics, petrology, source of mineralisation, its distribution, accumulation, various forms of consolidation as described in the links you outlined, and most importantly structure and stratigraphy, are valid and apply to this programme.
Currently, the company has had to rely heavily on geophysics to identify targets that are principally being tested by drilling and assaying, principally and obviously for commercial reasons.
A significant number of targets have been drill tested and assay confirmed and; results as we all know have been spectacular. I am also certain that the technical boys and girls have addressed many of the other principles I mentioned and will already have an idea or model of what the stratigraphic setting looks like in 3D on their computers, and how to pursue the targets and mineralisation within the structure.
Remember, the Mr. Alexander Project is more or less on an east west trending structure and as we see from the few maps that have been released; it is about 5km+ long and some 500m+ across. The geophysics signatures show a number of fault structures with several oblique cross features. Only drill core logging and DH geophysics from a plethora of holes will determine the attitude of the hosting and intrusive lithologies and the influence they had on the various forms of mineralisation we have seen so far.
To reiterate, we know we have zones of massive sulphides, sulphides in stockworks i.e. interconnected sulphide veining, and disseminated sulphides. I think the 18m intercept of MAD 71 displays all three modes of this mineralisation. But, this is only in one hole and it has not been replicated in any of the other very proximal holes.
We can speculate on the economic value of this intersection; but really to no purpose. Suffice to say that there have been several shallow narrow massive sulphide intersections that have been identified along the Mt. Alexander structure in the Cathedrals, Stricklands and Investigator prospects but there is no evidence that these were part of the one mass in the Mt. Alexander structure that have been subjected to deformation by structural movements and are now remnant rafts within the Mt. Alexander structure.
I don’t know that there are any significant fold features that would contribute to a nose structure, but we know that the Mt. Alexander Structure heads westward to intersect with a significant bend in the northerly trending Mt. Ida fault. Some believe that this fault may have acted as a conduit to mineralisation at various periods of its history and formation.
From all this you can see that we need a hec of a lot more data over the next 10 to 20 years before a full picture of Mt. Alexander is revealed. As they say in the vernacular, we haven’t scratched the scratch yet!
All the above is speculation on my part from the reports released to the ASX and I could be way off. I am happy to be corrected if other more informed posters wish to do so.
I trust this gives you some food for thought Nickel69 as I humbly close.
Cheers,
helmenesh.
Expand
(20min delay)