Thanks MarkyBoy49 and others who did the Ni % sulphides...

Thanks MarkyBoy49 and others who did the Ni % sulphides calculations (and Cu%) from the interpreted visual sulphide percentages made onsite by the geologist for MTJV001 diamond hole. When looking at the PGE's values from the Ni%, we should remember UFX's input that these visual estimates of % sulphides made by the onsite geologist, are very subjective and another geologist would interpret the visual % of sulphides very differently i.e. lower, higher, similar. If indeed the laboratory assayed Ni% from MTJV001 are similar to the visuals and calc's made, and if the Ni% vs PGE's (g/t) correlation from GAL's lab. assays holds, the MTJV001 hole could return some very-impressive PGE values.........

I haven't done this for Cu % yet.


Also, note that the MTJV001 hole is sited about 50m NNW of a surface gossan that sampled anomalous Ni and Pd. If there is a correlation between the deeper, fluid-altered ultramafics encountered in the MTJV001 hole (hydrothermal pathway to surface / significance??) and the surface gossan with Ni and Pd, this may have important implications for the two surface gossans located 1-2 kms south of MTJV001 and what may lie beneath the regolith between these surface gossan locations and the target horizon.


Kind regards OldGeo