We've been over this before. Petrie is correct on the numbering of the courses. The list of elevations and thickness for each course is listed at Birdsall's site.

Gantenbrink is wrong on the numbering of the courses. His model implies that both courses exit at the top of course 104, elevation 154c above the base. That is wrong, disproven by Petrie's diagrams. However, Gantenbrink's model is excellent as the primary model. The true exits are adjustments to the primary model. I don't understand how you have a problem with this.

As I understand it, Gantenbrink's original discoveries were published, in German, in MDAIK along with Stadelmann's article, but neither of these are published on the web as far as I can tell. Gantenbrink published his discoveries in English on the web at cheops.org in 1999, I believe, but he has completely removed his diagrams and articles on the shafts from the new site. The original articles have to be accessed through the Wayback Machine.

I have an English translation of an article by Gantenbrink from a 1997 New Age magazine (Quest for Knowledge). The original article on which it is based may be Gantenbrink's original MDAIK article, but I need a copy of the MDAIK article to compare it with.