Ann: Investor Presentation - RIU Gold Coast Resources Showcase, page-35

That's a rig picture with interesting implications. I'd have liked to see white but this looks to have been just the top 40m of that drill hole if each bag is 1m.

The shadow's extending behind the rig and the shadows from the cones are close to parallel to the rig. A driver in the rig would be looking NE, North or NW depending on the time of day.

Is it a morning, mid-day or afternoon picture?
The shadows are quite long so its probably not mid-day. Being an end of day picture of the work done for the day would make sense. If its end of day then the rig is facing to the NW. The drilling is another 90 degrees anticlockwise so they would be drilling to the SW (A morning picture would be a NW drilling direction)

A SW drill azimuth would make sense and could well be following the PoW lines. Most of the early Burmeister drilling was either 220-230 degrees or ~50 degrees and close to the PoW line directions.

What's interesting about that?
Most of the time geologists and the drill crew try to drill at close to perpendicular angles to the target pegmatite as possible. The drill angle is very steep. That tends to indicate a fairly flat target. If TG6 thought the presumed pegmatites at Target A/B were more steeply dipping they would probably be using default 60 degree angles but something has caused them to shift from this. Seismic? 2/3rd drill hole?

If the drilling is to the SW then it indicates an expectation the target pegmatite may be dipping to the NE. All the Burmeister peg's increase to the NE making this an unlikely drill angle for the rig if it was over at Burmeister. If it was drilling at Target B, I'd have expected to see some of Mt Gordon in the left hand side to middle of the background. By default this indicates the rig's at Target A.

If TG6 is drilling Target A as if its a gently sloping pegmatite that dips to the east then earlier guesses (and while sensible, they were guesses) about a sloping to the west pegmatite creating the soil anomaly may have missed the mark. While it was comparatively easy for a west tipping pegmatite to create a large anomaly on a west facing slope, its a lot harder for an east dipping pegmatite to create large soil anomalies on a west sloping face.

If you are going to change that pegmatite slope angle so that it dives into Mt Gordon, you need wider pegmatites to explain the anomaly noted. It would also mean Target B is potentially a pegmatite above target A.

Huge amounts of speculation within this post. DYOR (and please share)


TG6 has previously advised: