Next Article in Journal
Early Mission Calibration Performance of NOAA-21 VIIRS Reflective Solar Bands
Next Article in Special Issue
Marine Radar Constant False Alarm Rate Detection in Generalized Extreme Value Distribution Based on Space-Time Adaptive Filtering Clutter Statistical Analysis
Previous Article in Journal
Multi-Domain Joint Synthetic Aperture Radar Ship Detection Method Integrating Complex Information with Deep Learning
Previous Article in Special Issue
Analytical Coherent Detection in High-Resolution Dual-Polarimetric Sea Clutter with Independent Inverse Gamma Textures
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Performance of the Earth Explorer 11 SeaSTAR Mission Candidate for Simultaneous Retrieval of Total Surface Current and Wind Vectors

Remote Sens. 2024, 16(19), 3556; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16193556
by Adrien C. H. Martin 1,2,*, Christine P. Gommenginger 1, Daria Andrievskaia 2, Petronilo Martin-Iglesias 3 and Alejandro Egido 3
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3:
Remote Sens. 2024, 16(19), 3556; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs16193556
Submission received: 1 August 2024 / Revised: 20 September 2024 / Accepted: 23 September 2024 / Published: 24 September 2024

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript titled "Evaluating the performance of the Earth Explorer 11 SeaSTAR mission candidate for simultaneous retrieval of total surface current and wind vectors" presents a comprehensive numerical analysis of the Earth Explorer 11 (EE11) SeaSTAR mission concept. The study is crucial for understanding the capabilities and limitations of the SeaSTAR mission in retrieving ocean surface current and wind vector data, which are essential for global Earth System modeling and climate prediction. While the findings provide a solid foundation for assessing the SeaSTAR mission's capabilities, several outstanding questions still need to be explored.

 

1.     It is important to understand how the SeaSTAR mission's performance compares with existing remote sensing technologies. How does the SeaSTAR mission's performance compare with existing satellite scatterometers and altimeters in terms of spatial resolution, accuracy, and data continuity?

2.     The manuscript mentions a Bayesian framework used to derive TSCV and OSVW from satellite scattering measurements. Could the authors elaborate on the advantages and limitations of this Bayesian approach compared to traditional methods, particularly in addressing complex ocean phenomena?

3.     In the case of performance degradation at near-range and low wind speeds, as noted in Section 4, what is the extent of this issue, and are there specific strategies proposed to mitigate these effects for different wind directions?

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English language in the manuscript is generally of good quality. Only minor editing of the English language is required.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

see attached.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please find attached the comments.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop