Nice Orbital Simulations of Earth's Second Moon

> "Can you be more specific?"
> Okay, I got this from
> http://www.astro.queensu.ca/~wiegert/3753/3753.html. There is not
universal
> agreement of web sites on the orbits, but I believe this is a good
one.
> Some are clear about the fact that Cruthne's orbit is hard to
understand.
> But this site has nice graphics. The text (in part) reads;

Yes, I did check this site out before I made my post on the subject.

I still need you to explain in more detail your contention that it
takes Cruithne hundreds of years between close approaches to earth.
I just don't see it, even in Prof. Weigert's website.

All I see is a reference to a 385 year period for Cruithne to
complete its unique horseshoe orbit. Surely that isn't what you're
referring to!

I'm completely open to be corrected on this by the astronomers,
physicists and engineers on this list who can bring their expertise
to bear on the interpretation but I see something completely
different (assuming the hundreds of years you refer to is indeed the
385 years period I mentioned above.)

The way I understand it, Cruithne's yearly orbit is one issue, and
its horseshoe orbit are another thing. Let's refer to Prof.
Weigert's graphic showing the orbits

http://www.astro.queensu.ca/~wiegert/3753/3753_3.gif

The graphic in the upper left corner shoes Cruithne's yearly orbit.
This supports the graphic from the website I posted

http://burtleburtle.net/bob/physics/cruithne.html

which shows a consistent yearly approach between Earth and Cruithne.

The 385 year period for the horseshoe orbit to complete is another
matter entirely. The way I see it, the yearly orbit will take over
385 years to oscillate from one side of the horseshoe to the other.
It looks like for our lifetimes Cruithne will be under our South
Pole once per year.

What have I mis-interpreted in the above? Even both websites state
that there is a yearly orbit.