I've not been able to duplicate your drawing. I didn't agree with how you boxed the satellite pyramids, so in my composition I didn't box them. I like to see the point where the line enters the corner, and this can't be seen in your drawing because of the boxes. To make the far right line come closer to G1, I would have to fudge on the 'squares' of the satellite pyramids. I used thin lines because I think the thicker lines consume more space in a small diagram. If I were working with a photo 20 feet square for example, then thicker lines would not create as much of a distortion in closeness. Also, the 3 lines do not run parallel.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Your explanation of your diagram was :
What you have to keep in mind here, Pat, is that there is no clear line of sight between G1 and G3. And yet Menkaure seems to have somehow magically placed his pyramid and his so-called Queens' Pyramids on the axis of G1's inter-quarter lines.
As a rough calculation of my diagram, it appears the far right line misses G1 by about 33'. But then it's impossible to be exact using a satellite image. I would have to say your diagram is not exact enough to claim what you do about the "axis of G1's inter-quarter lines". It's close, but not close enough to use as proof.
On the upside, I think what you said below, is a very strong point in favor of the 3 having been planned together.
I would ask then that if the builder of G1 (the Great Pyramid) had a blank canvass at Giza (so to speak), why then did he not obtain for himself the highest, most prestigious ground in the centre of the plateau where G2 now stands?