RD I saw that same 5,000psi for 76H, somewhere, and I recall at...

RD
I saw that same 5,000psi for 76H, somewhere, and I recall at the time that it created overpressure issues that were the cause of the problem with the drill pipe separation due to the late introduction of extra heavy mud to control it.

I also just came across the design references for 77H that it would be located 300m from 76H, so I guess they dropped the earlier idea of 25 May 2012 of trying to tap into the activated region of 76H - which makes my post above redundant. So many bits of information to keep track of and they're all vital parts of the bigger Cambay jigsaw.


That 1,200 psi figure was mentioned in para 3 of the company announcement of 6 December 2011, CAMBAY-76H – INDIAN OPERATIONS RESUME < http://www.oilex.com.au/investor-in...ments-detail/2013/10/24/cambay-76h-resume-ops >
"Pressure at the wellhead has increased to approximately 1200psi. During the past week the well was “killed” for installation of a Blow Out Preventer (BOP). This build-up of pressure in the wellbore and the previously reported initial flowback of hydrocarbons and stimulation fluid in August, are interpreted to be encouraging for clean up and flow testing the well."

The company announcement of 2 July 2014, CAMBAY-77H WELL –Fracture Stimulation Operations Update, in para 3 refers to " Subsequent to Stage 1 activities, gas was detected at surface and elevated overpressure of ~5,000psi was measured indicating a pressure increase of 670psi. The original reservoir pressure of ~4,330psi was interpreted from the micro frac programme. This is consistent with Cambay-76H as highlighted in the Quarterly Report to Shareholders 30 September 2012."