Taking Advantage of a Forced Wrap-Around

Consider an auction:

Blah-blah-blah.  Spades agreed.

4NT would be RKCB, but partner bids 5C as Exclusion RKCB.

Notice that your answers are:

5D = 0/3
5H = 1/4
5S = 2 without the Queen
5NT = 2 with the Queen

Now, if this is your structure, you probably see that 5C as Exclusion RKCB forces slam when replier has "two plus the Queen." 

You also notice a problem.  If Replier has "1/4," there is insufficient space below 5S to ask for the Queen.  This might not be such a problem, as perhaps even "1 with the Queen" is not enough while "4" is enough for a grand (if 2+Q is enough for the small slam).

What about the 0/3 holding?  You have space for a Queen-ask, presumabl;y for grand slam purposes, in the 5H call.  But, you already know that any more questions are grand-slam oriented, if 2+Q is enough for slam.

It seems to me, then, that in this situation (and other similar situations) you can save space by wrapping around the answers.  You do not need (enough to matter) an answer showing yet another void, so why not put this wrap-around to better use?

One approach is this:

5D = 0, or 3 without the Queen (5H then asks for specific features as a grand probe)
5H = 1/4 (if 4, can bid on)
5S = 2 without
5NT = 2 with (asker can continue a grand probe if desired)
6C+ = 3 with the Queen, showing specific features (as if partner had bid 5NT himself)