Robust Trajectory Planning of Gliding-Guided Projectiles with Weak Maneuverability

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This paper addresses the trajectory planning problem of gliding-guided projectiles with low maneuverability attacking fixed targets. The paper is well-written, but I have the following comments:

 

1. The quality of the equation and figures should be improved. 

2. English should be re-checked.

3. It is good to add a separate section as"discussion" to highlight the features of the proposed method.

4. Adding some scenarios can be helpful in improving the presentation of the paper.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

N/A

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have three minor suggestions for the authors.

Figure 1 needs to be enlarged.

I would suggest the authors include condensed numerical results of their proposed methodology in the abstract

The authors should add a “Future work” section before the conclusion section that addresses any limitations of this study and proposes directions for future research and development.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper has a pronounced applicative character and deals in a complex way with a very complex issue. I think that two aspects should be clarified in the work, namely:

1. one of the initial hypotheses refers to the fact that the rotation of the project is done without inertia. I think it should be explained why this assumption is made and what exactly changes in the problem if there is still inertia.

2. the target is considered to be fixed. I consider that the authors should at least make a reference to the situation in which the target is mobile and how to approach such a situation.

I consider that the paper should be published if the two previous observations are taken into account.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I read the work with interest.

The formulation of the problem is correct, the solution is interesting, and the results obtained are plausible.

No observations. 

The paper can be published in present form

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have no further comments. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors have satisfactorily addressed all my concerns. This manuscript can be accepted.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I consider that the paper can be published now. The authors have done corrections of the first version.