Gantenbrink's model is correct as a primary design. Going by the TOPS of the shafts, the shafts commence at the 84c level and SHOULD exit at the 154c level, producing a 70c x 70c model for KCS and a 70c x 110c model for KCN. Note that Brabin's drawing has the bottom of the shafts exiting at the 154c level, when in Gantenbrink's model it is the top of the shafts that should exit at the 154c level. This level is at the top of course 104.

In actuality, the MIDDLE of KCS exits one course (9 palms) lower than the 154c level, at the top of course 103, while the BOTTOM of KCN exits two courses (19 palms) lower, at the top of course 102. This is the difference between what Petrie and Gantenbrink are recording. Petrie is recording the actual exits; Gantenbrink is recording the theoretical or ideal exits according to his whole palm seked model.

As I said, Gantenbrink's model is correct as a primary design. However, the actual exits show adjustments for various reasons. In the case of KCS, it is to create an adjustment to the horizontal measure. The base of the hypothetical pyramid at the 154c level is 198 cubits while the base of the hypothetical pyramid at the 152c 5p level (top of course 103) is 200 cubits. As I have said in another thread, the 200c measure is important in pyramid dimensions generally. It is the height of both the Bent and Red pyramids, and the dimensions of this hypothetical 200c base, 14:11 slope pyramid appear to have been used as the model for the next pyramid, that of Djedefre.

Note to Robin: You said in a previous thread that you got "hauled over the coals" for stating that the distance between the exit points was 200 cubits. This is only true for the top of course 103, which is targeted by KCS. Now, Gantenbrink's model for KCS is 70c rise and 70c run (which expresses the 99:70 geometry of r2), but this model is destroyed by the lowering of the exit by 9 palms. Yet the primary model remains, only hidden.