Ann: Mineralised carbonatites intersected over 3.5km -West Arunta, page-167

Morning all.
@salpetie Awesome post again mate.
There are some confusing components to this story as it has developed.
I will start with this pic.

It is really interesting to observe the magnetics on this map and take particular notice of the magnetics at Luni.
That appears to be a magnetic low as opposed to the WA1 P2 discovery.



We know that magnetics and gravity surveys have different parameters as WA1 has shown with the passive seismic they have done.
The map above shows very little attention to the section to the nth of Luni.

Then WA1 conduct an In-fill ground survey to come up with this.
Make sure you notice the difference of the anomaly prior to the In-fill results in the bottom RHS.




From that, they have modelled what they think is a feeder.




The reason I make a point of this is the development and changes we are seeing as this story progresses.

Now we look at the latest gravity survey conducted by ENR and how that was illustrated in the pic below.


This is the style of Gravity that is used in the search for Iron as in IOCG which this pic shows some compelling targets.
As I understand it, the Falcon gravity survey which is what was used ( as indicated by BHP in the search for IOCG ), needs clear still weather, ( which they got during the survey ) is done by fixed wing aircraft so that the variation, ( caused by wind ) are not as dramatic as say Drone conducted surveys.
This is why there was such strong mentions of IOCG Yet they do not seem to apply to the Luni discovery until more passive measures are applied.

If you look back up to top the pic in this post, the Faults, there appears more association of Ree to those Faults than to original gravity or magnetics that can be sourced from our government mapping.
It is not until further passive practices are applied.

So what does all that mean?
I remain positive that the main gravity features here are suggesting IOCG but the addition of Ree will make this more valuable and exciting as we progress.


To make this even a little more confusing is this pic which is Residual Gravity and gives another picture to the targets.
Note the Gravity and hence the cooler colours of Luni, Wild, Hurley and even Hochke.
Fault related and low Gravity on the parameters of the application used for this.



I would really like to have a Q&A with the Geo to find out how they are progressing and the targeting changing.
No doubt their minds are full of some of the answers that we still have the questions for and why the excitement is winding up here.

I am convinced that there will be further discoveries made here.
To elaborate on the point that salpetie made, "Why peg the ground so far to the North?"
My guess is that, Look at the Seismic signatures Government mapping and more broad surveys, then look at Luni and Wild for example.
Close up and zeroing in with passive ground surveys, may show some very different results as has done with Luni.

I just hope it shows very big differences in share price.

Kind regards, Wack.