I reckon they probably will go for 4 x 4.5, but they would need an awfull lot of hand held stopes contiusly going pumping out stone and new ones in the wind as a constant backup, development dives into teh orebody would need only be 3 x 3m, I allways hear warning bells when companies look at larger declines, but thats just me.
Just say a miner breaks 20t to 30 t a shift he would be pushing it to scrape the ore out and ground support in time to get a second wack at it. so say 5 stopes working is not that much tonnage to tram to the surface.
May be able to shrink stope the ore body down deeper wher the reefs are lot steeper, and then remot bog it.
Even Bendigo have opted to bring some of their ore drives down to 3m using a 104 and a 1300 bogger, they were just getting too much dilution
The other issue with larger declines is space for mullock. The A1 is Doing 3 x 3.5m and already generated a lot. Space is at a premium in the mountains and I think would be a factor to consider (can't just fill valleys and cover streams)
I agree with you vent comments but the decline could be planned in 2 or 3 stages, at depth (even at not so deep)raise bores will be required
MCO Price at posting:
36.5¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
