Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Highlighting legend: Yellow denotes text that is replaced by the text in the note; Green denotes text whose meaning is unclear as described in the note; Red denotes deletion.

Replace 'threatening' with 'hazardous' (also in figures). Replace 'literature[ ]' with 'Reference[ ]' when making citations. You should give the basis for why there is deviation between RFLTA's computed flight trajectory and the simulated trajectory that was flown (did you use human-piloted simulation?).

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Editor and Reviewers,

Thanks for your kind review and consideration of the manuscript for the publication in Aerospace. We have responded to the comments point-by-point. Please see the attachment.

And We have revised the manuscript in accordance with the reviewers’ comments and highlighted the revised text in the revised version. 

I hope that current version of the work could answer all the outstanding questions. Shall you have any further questions, please do not be hesitated in contacting me via Email: buaa_dnc@buaa.edu.cn. 

Many thanks and kind regards!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper proposes a method to improve the performance of the classical forward-looking terrain warning approach by considering the current bank angle of the helicopter and navigation errors. The proposed method is implemented and compared with the classical one using a simulated trajectory and digital elevation map to show that the alert’s reliability can be improved. Although the curvilinear motion can be predicted and the impact of the current roll angle of the helicopter on the terrain avoidance can be assessed easily to overcome the drawback of the classical forward-looking terrain warning approach using the simulation-based approaches in the literature, the presentation of the pipe-shaped side boundary via the geometrical relationships can be evaluated as a contribution. The paper is clear, and the contribution is described properly.   

Author Response

Dear Editor and Reviewers,

Thanks for your kind review and consideration of the manuscript for the publication in Aerospace. We checked the English language and style of the manuscript. And we have revised the manuscript in accordance with the reviewers’ comments and highlighted the revised text in the revised version. 

I hope that current version of the work could answer all the outstanding questions. Shall you have any further questions, please do not be hesitated in contacting me via Email: buaa_dnc@buaa.edu.cn. 

Many thanks and kind regards!