The anticipated footwall contact zone (FCTZ) in hole 6 (the stepout hole) was a lot shallower (175m to 183m downhole) than, say, hole 5 in the main areas drilled (375m to 383m downhole). ie. around half as deep.
Past the FCTZ, hole 6 hit a very wide intermittent shear zone from 296m to 450m downhole, whilst hole 5 hit the shear zone much deeper at 428m to 458m downhole.
So the large width between the (shallower) start of the FCTZ (at 175m) and the base of the wide shear zone (450m) would presumably account for the bulk of the hole 6 core that was cut, logged and sent for assay.
I know there’s already a shaft, (from the former mine) but if the start of the mineralisation (if it is indeed proven to be mineralised) keeps getting shallower as suggested by the stepout hole, you could potentially also be looking at the option of a conventional portal and drive to access the orebody!
Again, subject to positive assays, it would be interesting to step out, say, a further 200m, and see if they can hit even shallower mineralisation.
Any thoughts?
CML Price at posting:
3.7¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)