The more I learn about this, the more I am inclined to agree with the cynics.

Knocker was absolutely right to bring up the problem referring to jack hammers and their like, something I overlooked. This, in a way is where we are falling down in this country. Years ago a problem once recognized such as the dust problem would have been tackled and solved. Today all we seem to say is if HSE say's it can't be done then that's it.
Until we start to give what few inventors we have the respect they deserve, things, such as small scale mining will never happen

---

I know it's completely :offtopic: but have you seen the lable on a packet of peanuts: May Contain Nuts :confused:

---

various detail from a number of sources there, covering my original point in detail - ie that traditional Cornish methods of total extraction, narrow vein mining using airlegs and Hudson tubs has been a dead end for 40 years.

Likewise the Cornish industry has been a professional dead end for the same time, at least. I visited South Crofty about two years ago, and the management team seemed to consist in large part of local men who in some cases, I had last met in the 1970s. This did nothing to change the view I'd formed in the 1970s, that there was no useful purpose in staying there.

While I was at "the project which mustn't be named", one of the Mine Managers was a former manager from Wheal Jane. He was one of a number of experienced men who were put through a "grandfather rights" entry for Chartered Engineer status - because his Cornish career had not provided the opportunity to do this.

For that matter, he didn't have a Mine Manager's ticket, for that same reason that I don't have a Mine Surveyor's ticket ( nor, AFAIK, does agricola ) - because "miscellaneous" mining is outside the scope of the relevant legislation and the opportunity to do it, is not available.

Boulby's Chief Surveyor has an MQB ticket, although it isn't strictly required, as does his deputy - a CSM graduate who did MQB a few years ago with British Coal.

Hence my comments regarding the absence of professional opportunities in Cornwall

---

Personally knowing Agricola (As a student of his at the same time as Boulbys Deputy), I know him to be a damn fine surveyor along with other surveyors at Crofty. Are you suggesting to be a recognised mine surveyor you have to have NCB (Bearing in mind the NCB no longer exists) qualifications or have I misunderstood? To be quite frank in this country there has been an obsession that mining is all about coal - with regards to Boulby it is far closer to a coal mine than a metalliferous mine, suffering many of the same hazards and requiring similar mining techniques.

With regards to members of the existing board of directors I cannot vouch for their abilities, I have my personal thoughts as you do - however what is very apparent is they have a great deal of determination and patience having worked on the project since 1998 (As part of the Wilf Hughes attempt) - and I do admire their ability to attract funding, whether you think it will be successful or not they have provided a wage in the area for no small number of men - so that is one good thing that can't be changed.

This is precisely my point - that the MQB Mine Surveyors' ticket, along with a number of other qualifications, is defined extremely narrowly, in terms of coal mining.

strictly speaking, it is possible to qualify without this, but since the dinosaurs at M&Q blind themselves to this, and the demand is effectively met by a dwindling number of surveyors who passed in the 1980s, it is a dead end.

I couldn't get them to accept experience under NCB procedures, under ex-NCB management systems, outside UK and just gave up. One of the Hydrock surveyors at Bath was going to do the practical exam, but cancelled when they told him that they wouldn't accept his past experience in coal mines because it pre-dated the practical. Again, he was a very competent man who I had every confidence in, but no go.

The MQB syllabus was written in the 1970s, and shows it. Boulby like it because (a) they have a preponderance of ex-NCB people there and (b) they are a "gassy" mine which as you rightly say, is more like a coal mine than anything else. British Gypsum kicked it into the long grass years ago and use civils tunnelling practices.

There are quite a few very experienced mining surveyors around but they cannot, strictly speaking, call themselves MQB-qualified. Of course, this doesn't matter in Cornwall because the relevant legislation is not applicable.

To revert to the earlier topic, this is why a lot of my contemporaries went to Zambia, Australia or South Africa - to become professionally qualified. This is why Scott Wilson "grandfathered" a number of older personnel into MIMMM status at Bath.

The fact of the matter is that if you are in the business of competing for employment in a multi-national, high-tech industry, you need some sort of post-graduate or professional qualification. I'm fairly cynical about CEng, but it certainly provides an edge and opens doors that would otherwise be closed to me.

There never was any route to doing this in Cornwall, apart from doing a PhD at CSM, and they were very few in number.

CSM now have a module in conjunction with RICS, which will ( hopefully ) replace MQB when the last of the old timers are finally put out to grass; but how you will get a Mine Manager's ticket, or an electrical engineer, beats me.



I don't know the Board at Crofty. I only met the people at the mine. I've seen all the name-calling and accusations, and it doesn't greatly interest me. I'll certainly never hear the truth of it, so why should I care.

I've seen many examples over the years of that well-known business model by which an operation is built up to a certain size and sold on, or that other one by which successive investors put money into prospects that never quite come off for reasons which only they know.

Like you, I'd much rather see blokes paid a worthwhile wage for doing a 'real' job. I've seen plenty of dry holes drilled in remote and downright bloody awful places at costs that make Crofty look like a car boot sale, exploration costs money and entails risk.

---

The subject of qualifications is always good for an arguement.
In days gone by there were so many people passing through the NCB training schemes that there was always a ready supply of 'ticketed' engineers and surveyors.
Those days are gone and the stock of such people, myself included, are nearing the end of our working lives.
There are schemes afoot to try and replace the traditional qualifications. The Mines Rescue Service are offering courses and various schemes have been set up by interested parties.
The schemes are mainly aimed at general workers and technicians. To my knowledge, nobody is offering to pay for managers or electrical/mechanical engineers.
In another 10 years it will be interesting to see who is running things!

Reading the full report on SEDAR, it is clear that the report defines the ore reserve in the initial mining phase, with the aim to be to work up a bankable feasibility study over the next 12 months - there are many other likely (Known and assumed) lode areas that are not covered in the JORC statement with a total reserve in the order of 30 Million Tonnes@1%. It appears that a 2nd underground diamond drill rig is to be deployed over the next few months and an increase in drillers, geologists and engineers to back this up.

ok that makes sense.

There definitely IS tin and other things in that area, it's been well known for decades. It certainly wasn't mineable by traditional methods.

I will read SEDAR when I have some time.

I wouldn't say I was a "cynic" in the sense of someone who didn't believe a word of it, but I've had a lot of experience of marginal projects whose real function was financial manipulation of various descriptions, and Crofty ( as currently constituted ) is small change to anyone in the extractive industries business.

It was always obvious that there was enough in the proposal to warrant spending a certain amount of speculative costs, but you have to bear in mind that compared to, say, the drilling and exploration being done off the Falklands, diamond drilling above the water table from a drive-in drift with no gas issues isn't a big investment.

It also doesn't change my previous point. When I was at CSM, there were always tightly closed circles involved in local matters to which you were NOT invited. Concord and the perennial Cligga investigations were typical cases. I was at Foraky in the early 80s, closing out the mining dept between drilling jobs, and I read a body of correspondence to the effect that having decided not to tender for the Geevor sub-main, there was no likely worthwhile body of work in any foreseeable future and local enquiries could be disregarded. Thyssens wasted a lot of time and effort chasing the re-opening of Allen's Shaft.

---

It's not really clear whether the resource figure quoted includes the non-compliant estimates from previous operations, or just what has been located by drilling at shallow depths. Whatever it is, the history of drill exploration in Cornwall over the past 50 years or so suggests that grades are so variable that drilling is very useful in defining targets for underground development, but any grade figures given by drilling alone must be regarded as highly speculative. Only once on lode development has been carried out can any real indication of grade be given, & would have thought would be necessary to give even an inferred resource grade. I'm sure this would be just as true now as it was in 40-50 years ago, even if the defenitions of resource/reserve have changed.

The quoted resource is purely the shallow dolcoath zones named as far as I can see.

With regards to the accuracy and interpretation of DD holes. I personally think it is possible to get a more accurate picture than 10 years ago, let alone 30 - 40 years ago for purely technical reasons: -

1. The drills have a far greater accuracy and range and are quicker (Making the drill hole cheaper and less time consuming)

2. The survey and assay methods again have improved massively.

At the end of the day all exploration relys greatly on probabilities - few ore reserves give a consistent grade, as such a certain amount of exploration is required to give an acceptable confidence in predicted grades. The one advantage of the Central Mining District is it is a relatively well understood mineralised zone.

The last two posts would be very much consistent with the view I'd tend to take; that the Wide Formation has been long known to be very variable, rich in parts, barren in others and very difficult to assess.

A scenario by which the investors are seeking to establish a sufficiently detailed model using modern techniques of drilling, assaying and computer modelling, in the expectation of being able to generate a suitable mining plan ( which I would guess to be a drill-and-fire, trackless method depending upon a sufficiently detailed mining plan for its viability ) would make perfect sense.

It would also be quite common for a model of this sort to pass through the hands of a series of investors, seeking to complete the model by a limited investment, buying another investors' unproductive development at below cost and pulling the plug after a while if no results were forthcoming.

---

I've seen many examples over the years of that well-known business model by which an operation is built up to a certain size and sold on, or that other one by which successive investors put money into prospects that never quite come off for reasons which only they know.

It would also be quite common for a model of this sort to pass through the hands of a series of investors, seeking to complete the model by a limited investment, buying another investors' unproductive development at below cost and pulling the plug after a while if no results were forthcoming.

Sounds like the sort of thing we get up to in Biotec/Pharma as well ::)

The more I learn about this, the more I am inclined to agree with the cynics.

I would tend to agree 😮

However we are learning about an area that no one has seen in nearly 200 years.

Interesting times ...

For those who know, when you know whats goin on please let me know :lol:

---

surviving as a contractor in the oil industry is ALL about making the best assessment you can, and following what seems to be a logical course of action consistently.

The 'official' version of the story may, or may not, form any part of this assessment.... ::)

There is a well-established business model by which a company is built up to the point where it is profitable but requires more investment than the current management have any prospect of raising, to progress. The options are, essentially, to stand still and be overtaken, to attempt to raise the money ( in which case you are likely to be pushed out by those representing the new management ) or to sell out.

Seacore at Falmouth are a good example of the latter case; Fugro are well known for buying out competitors once they reach a certain size, and subsuming them over time into their structure until no identifiable remnant of the original company remains.

There is clearly sufficient potential at Crofty for them to be abloe to attract and retain quite a strong team over a fairly long period of time, and attract various investors for reasons which may, or may not, revolve around actual profitable production.

let's see what happens

---

So... I was in Tesco car park earlier and noticed that Robinsons headframe was mostly uncovered now.... but that wasn't all that I noticed.

They've only gone and removed the bloody skip guides from the middle of it! It's ended up looking a bit like Allens shaft with sheave wheels!

Apologies for the bad photo quality. Taken on an ancient phone!

I popped into Tesco the other day and thought the same thing.

They have done a lovely job with the headgear, shame about the guides. I assume they replaced the ambideck over the shaft as it had the guides coming through it.

I don't think the shaft timberwork was looking clever and perhaps they thought that if some of it came unshipped, it was better to have it doing so under the grille.

Perhaps they've replaced it with a big interactive screen!

It's a shame they didn't replace it really... as it gives the impression to mining-newbies that the cage just hung around in the air!

I wont be the first in the queue to get in the cage then ;)

Otherwise the headframe doesn't look bad from a distance

---