RCS Measurement and Characteristic Analysis of a Sea Surface Small Target with a Shore-Based UHF-Band Radar

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I have a few recommendations about the manuscript.

1-)The novelty of the research should be emphasized in the introduction. 

2-)The results should be discussed in an additional discussion section. 

3-) There are many typos, grammatical errors, and some of the sentences that are not suitable for academic language. Please check lines 20, 41, 59, 61, 64, 82, and 94 and correct the sentences. These are just a few of the ones I've seen, so all manuscripts should be double-checked.

4-)Clarity should be increased, especially in the introduction part. Long sentences cause shifts in the meaning of the sentence

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper presents an experimental plan of fishing vessel to verify the RCS characterization of sea surface small target in terms of aspect angles and wave conditions. Detailed experiments are provided to validate the effectiveness of the presented test method. Overall, this paper is both complete and interesting. I have the following suggestions:

1. Abstract: The major novelty of this study is not highlighted. Please specify.

Line 11: ‘UHF’ should give its full spelling.

Line 20: ‘…and wave condition are’, delete ‘are’.

2. Introduction: It’s better to summary more works on the test method. I’m very wonder what different level of sea conditions impact on the target RCS.

Line 29: Please add the target detection [1,2].

[1] X. Hua, Y. Ono, L. Peng and Y. Xu, "Unsupervised Learning Discriminative MIG Detectors in Nonhomogeneous Clutter," in IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol. 70, no. 6, pp. 4107-4120, June 2022.

[2] J. Liu, D. Massaro, D.Orlando, and A. Farina, ``Radar Adaptive Detection Architectures for Heterogeneous Environments,'' IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, Vol. 68, pp. 4307-4319, July 2020.

3. Introduction: The main contributions should be summarized in the last paragraph.

4. Please cite some references for the existence equations.

5. Section 3: I’m very wonder what different level of sea conditions impact on the target RCS.

6. Line 329: ‘5. Conclusions’ should be ‘4. Conclusions’.

7. Conclusions: It’s better to point out the limitation of your work and further improvements.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript has been improved and I don't have any other concerns.

Reviewer 2 Report

The authors have addressed all my concerns.