Electric Rocket Launcher Aircraft—Drone-Launched Short Range Rocket System
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The structure of the article needs to be modified. The article introduces the basic principles, then the art technology, and finally follows an example. It is less like a research paper and more like a report.
In the introduction of the basic principles, no regularity summary is obtained. For the calculation of electric pump power and rocket engine thrust, these are obvious to this professional researcher and they are not new. For the calculation of rocket motor thrust in Equation 3, it should be the effective exhaust velocity, not the exhaust speed. The physical meaning of these two parameters is different.
In the presentation of the art technology, this section is more like a review than a research paper. In Table 3, liquid oxygen is written more as LOX than LO2. When using RPA to calculate the exhaust velocity, why the actual exhaust velocity is 0.92 and 0.94 times the ideal exhaust velocity. Also, the specific impulse of a rocket engine is a more important parameter than the exhaust velocity. Also, a specific nozzle expansion ratio is generally given for comparison, since the nozzle expansion ratio determines whether it can be installed in a rocket or not.
The last example will be better if they are combined with the principles. It is not clear what can be illustrated by the calculations of this example and the conclusions obtained.
It is hoped that the authors will re-structure the article so that the research question is clear and more meaningful conclusions are obtained.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your work! All the questions are addressed in the attached file.
Sincerely,
Dr. Mikhail Shubov
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
I find the article rather well written, however, the following points need to be addressed. The overall interest of the article is limited in my opinion.
- l 96: change volumetric to mass
- eq 10: I doubt that P_{mass} = P_{mass}\frac{F_{rocket}}{M_{rocket}} you'll have to rewrite this.
- l 134: I don't see why high chamber pressure increases exhaust velocity more at sea level. Unclear !
- eq 12 vs. l89: Using different units for pressure (atm and bar) is confusing. Pick one and stick to it.
- l186-191: I do not understand why DLSRR requires higher power than ERLA ?
l 231: Bug "eghth".
- l246: Explain why we can not use the main engine(s) and tanks for landing (falcon 9 for instance)
- eq17: I don't get this. eq10 tells me that the specific power is the total power divided by the rocket mass. The rocket mass diminishes while the total power stays the same, so how can the specific power go down ?
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your work! All the questions are addressed in the attached file.
Sincerely,
Dr. Mikhail Shubov
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments are attached.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your work! All the questions are addressed in the attached file.
Sincerely,
Dr. Mikhail Shubov
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The author has revised the relevant content and provided answers to my doubts. I think this manuscript meets the requirements of the journal.
Author Response
Thank you!
Reviewer 3 Report
The authors have addressed all the comments satisfactorily. Only minor correction is required.
1. In line 276, full stop is missing at the end of the sentence.
2. In line 325, Modification of sentence is required. "is given below" do not fit well in continuation with the sentence.
Author Response
Thank you.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
