Next Article in Journal
Evaluation of CYGNSS Observations for Snow Properties, a Case Study in Tibetan Plateau, China
Previous Article in Journal
Real-Time Source Apportionment of PM2.5 Highlights the Importance of Joint Controls on Atmospheric Pollution in Cold Region of China
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Remote Sensing
Volume 14
Issue 15
10.3390/rs14153771
Review Report
remotesensing-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Article
Peer-Review Record

The Nature of the Ny-Ålesund Wind Field Analysed by High-Resolution Windlidar Data

Remote Sens. 2022, 14(15), 3771; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14153771
by Sandra Graßl 1,2,*, Christoph Ritter 1 and Alexander Schulz 1
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Remote Sens. 2022, 14(15), 3771; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14153771
Submission received: 24 June 2022 / Revised: 21 July 2022 / Accepted: 2 August 2022 / Published: 5 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Atmospheric Remote Sensing)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Overall this manuscript is well written and structured. The authors presented the wind data  from their previous publication (Ref [1]), and discussed the occurrence and physical properties of arctic long jets.

 

I have the following main concerns about this manuscript that require the authors to further clarify:

(1) The authors may need to clearly state the new scientific contributions of this manuscript, as the wind data have been available in the public literature. For example, new developments of sensors suing the field measurements, or new methodology of analysis, etc.

The following comments are rather minor:

(2) Table 3 needs to re-arrange to have a better presentation. Some data are overlay.

(3) Citation of figures "figure X" should be "Figure X".

Unless the authors can clearly justify the major comments regarding new contribution, I would only recommend this manuscript as a case study rather than full-length research article.

Author Response

Dear anonymous reviewer,

thank you for your suggestions for improvement. Please find our complete answer in the attached document.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The manuscript shows the analysis of rare wind measurements in the polar region using Windlidar. The authors define and analyse Long Jets. The manuscript is very well written. The tables are poorly formatted.
Minor comments:
Figure 3. please zoom out on the sub figure. It is not easy to find the location on the map of Europe.
L378 Please explain the z value in "with z being the z value".
Table 3. null hypothesis missing

Author Response

Dear anonymous reviewer,

thank you for your suggestions for improvement. Please find our complete answer in the attached document.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report


Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear anonymous reviewer,

thank you for your suggestions for improvement. Please find our complete answer in the attached document.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript has been improved. The authors have addressed my comments. Now, I recommend it.

Back to TopTop