RE:worth mentioningIn referring to the 3D Chargeability Model, I notice different slices at different depths. I also notice that the Chargeability Map, superimposed on the photographic background, says 250 MSL (Mean Sea Level). I also looked at a topographic map that shows the drilling area to be on or near a 250 foot elevation contour. My take on this is,
a) the 250 MSL means surface, 200 MSL means 50m deeper and so on. So the top slice is surface and the bottom slice is 200m deep in the 3D Model. But we can't see the results in the lower slices below surface.
b) the only target that I can see down to 200m depth is Target D. It is much wider and stronger at depth around 100m, than at surface.
c) according to the 3D Chargeability Model, the 250 MSL (surface) slice shows:
Target A being weak
Target B being weak
Target C being strong
Target D being strong
Target E being moderate
Target F being strong
Except for Target D, what the rest of the targets are like at depth I don't know. Target F looks like it starts out strong, then pinches out and then gets stronger near 200m depth.
It would have been nice to see each of the slices. And how about some more slices down to 500m. RTM has not been overly generous with their data. But I guess some data is better than nothing!!