Spatial Grid-Based Position Calculation Method for Satellite-Ground Communication Links

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper presents a spatial grid-based position calculation method for satellite ground communication links.  By using the GeoSOT grid optimization model,  the grid distance calculation is used to replace the angle calculation in terms of star-ground visibility. The proposed method can provide to connect a more suitable satellite and adjust the beam to the satellite direction in time. This paper is easy to follow, and the topic is suitable for remote sensing, but some problems should be more carefully handled before further proceedngs.

1. The scientific contribution of this paper should be more clearly clarified, particularly the difference of using GeoSOT.
2. The GeoSOT model should be more clearly explained in the methodology part.
3. The other methods in relevant work should be compared in the experimental part.
4. The language can be further polished by native speakers.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

 

Thanks very much for taking your time to review our manuscript. I really appreciate all your comments and suggestions! Your suggestions have enabled us to improve our work. We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. Appended to this letter is our point-by-point response to your comments. The comments are reproduced and our responses are given directly afterward in a different colour (red), which shown in the Word file below.

We hope that the revised manuscript is accepted for publication in the Reomote Sensing.

Best regards,

 

Sincerely,

Leike An

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

In this paper, the optimization model of GeoSOT is proposed to solve the problem of information transmission loss during the connection between satellite and ground receiving station, which is of certain research significance. However, there are some problems in this paper that need to be modified:

1. The abstract needs to be further condensed to highlight the innovation of the research work. In line 19, the description of the results is too simple. The research contributions of the paper should be articulated more clearly. The abstract is not representative of the content and contributions of the paper. The abstract does not seem to properly convey the rigor of research. The problems are pointed out as " it is easy to lead to the loss of satellite-ground communication link and the loss of satellite transmission information ", but only speed aspect is described in the results.
2. The introduction needs to be further restructured to highlight the problems you have studied. How to solve them in this paper. In the introduction, I think there is a lack of connection between these paragraphs. For example, the problem pointed out in line 58 is not reflected in the previous examples, and what is the relationship between the "switching criteria" here and the calculation efficiency emphasized in this paper?
3. What is the novelty of this research?
4. It is suggested to present the structure of the article at the end of the introduction.
5. I think there is a lack of references in the method.
6. 3.3. Accuracy and computational efficiency analysis experiments

This description is confusing to the reader. If the effect is introduced from two aspects, please explain that the results are shown in different figures. Also suggest that you change the presentation of Figure 10 and Figure 11. In Figure 11, what is the reason for the difference in the presentation of the 10-15 levels, and where is it seen that there is better accuracy when above 500km?

7. The resolution of some pictures in the article is too low, which affects reading.
8. Does line 207 need to add the (1)?
9. Line 341, why level 10? I think the result here should be strengthened.
10. The discussion should summarize the manuscript's main finding(s) in the context of the broader scientific literature and address any limitations of the study or results that conflict with other published work. It could be strengthened by adding more recent references. I think the discussion about Figure 14 is obvious and somewhat unnecessary.
11. Conclusion: It is suggested to add some work improvement problems and prospects.

Author Response

Thanks very much for taking your time to review our manuscript. We really appreciate all your comments and suggestions! Your suggestions have enabled us to improve our work. We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. Appended to this letter is our point-by-point response to your comments. The comments are reproduced and our responses are given directly afterward in a different colour (red), which shown in the Word file below.

We hope that the revised manuscript is accepted for publication in the Reomote Sensing.

Best regards,

 

Sincerely,

Leike An

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper presented is interesting and has higj scientific soundness. The quality of the link between sattelite and terminal is crucial for information transmission.  I have some issues and recommendations.

1) What is coverage area grid characterization from a mathematician's point of view? Could You, please, explain the main features of this notion with more details.

2) Fig. 1 -2 are not clear enough. I think that the highest grid level   to be dissected should be shown in Figure 2.

3) What does the notation in the first line of Eq. (2) mean? Is it an operator? 

4) Please, correct 'The' in Line 181 (should be 'the').

5) Please, correct 'earth' in Line 182 (should be 'Earth').

6) Figure 4 is not clear enough.

7) Figures 8-9 are rather unreadable. Please, give more information on what is shown in those. 

3)

Author Response

Thanks very much for taking your time to review our manuscript. We really appreciate all your comments and suggestions! Your suggestions have enabled us to improve our work. We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes in the manuscript. Appended to this letter is our point-by-point response to your comments. The comments are reproduced and our responses are given directly afterward in a different colour (red), which shown in the Word file below.

We hope that the revised manuscript is accepted for publication in the Reomote Sensing.

Best regards,

 

Sincerely,

Leike An

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I have no more comments and think the paper can be published now.