2012 PEA - Page 96 - 702 boreholes, of which
183 were drilled from surface and
519 drilling from various underground workings https://secure.kaiserresearch.com/i/jk/tr16/TRNKL20120801.pdf 2014 - PEA - Page 88 776 holes - 68,898.30 meters
https://www.wellgreenplatinum.com/pdf/Wellgreen_2014_Resource_Technical_Report.pdf 2015 - PEA - Page 182 776 holes - 68,898.30 m
https://s21.q4cdn.com/491660439/files/doc_downloads/2015pea/2015_wg_pea_report.pdf 2023 - PFS - Page 115 Total meters - 92,282 ( Arch included )
2023 breaks down drilling with,
Diamond holes surface drilling
Diamond holes ug drilling
Reverse circular = 128 holes https://s21.q4cdn.com/491660439/files/doc_downloads/2023/nickel-creek-prefeasibility-study-report-final.pdf See what i see ? Junior reports always distinguish between what kind of drill hole.
Diamond, size of bit, diameter etc...
Reverse circular
2012 report is a different breed. Grades are higher.
Such points to = UG mine high grade geology.
2012 ug bore holes =
519 holes 2023 reverse circular =
128 holes Some might say,
you didn't add the total number of ug holes from 2023.
Correct.
Why ?
Because 2023 stipulates ( diamond drill holes ) underground.
Which begs... Could the 2012 bore holes comprise a different resource applied to ug mine
using only, bore holes ?
2012 - Page 83
WS 08 165 - drill hole - assayed @ 664 meters down.
WS 10 178 drill hole - assayed @ 560 meters down.
2017 Press said, test sulphides and gabbs at later date.
= this type of geology matches - ug mine.
It's great to compare all 4 reports with # of drill holes + meterage + grades
YET.... the real carving happens when engineer block models resources
using cut off economics.
Tweak cut offs, bump higher - can easily alter a resources size
Same with, modelling a deposit with, Pt Eq vs Ni Eq
Or, not factoring other viable minerals to create connective block continuity.
What do other peers use for inferred resource spacing between holes ? Ivanhoe May 11, 2016 — ... spacing); Inferred Mineral Resources are drilled on
400 x 400 m (locally to 400 x 200 m and 200 x 200 m) spacing Talon inferred holes were drilled 200 metres apart along the grid lines FPX indicated Indicated resources are drilled on approximate 200 x 200 metre drill spacing My former post titled ( found more deep holes )
https://stockhouse.com/companies/bullboard/t.ncp/nickel-creek-platinum-corp?postid=35937057 This image shows 2015 Pit Shell only 34% of resource vs phase 5 pit shell
Note - no elevation scale can be seen
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53520608537_e27368a5f4_c.jpg This image ( with my own impression overlay )
does show elevation scale
= 365 meters more ore below pea pit shell.
= significant tonnage
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53597567652_fc61536a22_z.jpg For shhhh and giggles,
how much tonnage could be amassed if,
bore holes outlined 500 m x 500m x 600m deep x 2.7 ore weight
=
405,000,000 million tonnes Yukon dossier on Wellgreen even mentions deep bore holes.
Another logs 4 deep bore holes.
If inferred resources can be calculated using,
200m spacing and as pointed out above, 400m spacing.
What would happen to an inferred resource if a few deep bore holes ?
or deep diamond holes were not factored ?
Or, one deep hole forgotten between a 400m wide spacing ?
= it would destroy an inferred resource interpolation.
= same goes with cut off tweaking even, Pt Eq switch up to, Ni Eq
Are these deeper holes with in range of inferred compliance ?
Appears so.
Deep drilling and long intercepts
= stacks tonnage fast
I came across a few more deep holes.
Aiming northerly opposite side of mine.
These kind of holes assist in broadening the ( ug mine ) south to north
Pretty sure,
2016 performed reverse circular and diamond
to obtain MET test tonnage.
All the more bore holes.
So.... are bore holes different than, diamond core ?
Cheers....