Chaff Cloud Integrated Communication and TT&C: An Integrated Solution for Single-Station Emergency Communications and TT&C in a Denied Environment

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1.       Could the authors provide a brief explanation or rationale behind the chosen title of the paper? Understanding the title's significance would help readers grasp the focus and scope of the research more effectively.

2.       Could you please share your thoughts on how the abstract and conclusion sections could be improved to ensure they effectively communicate the essence and significance of your research to a broader audience? Strengthening these sections could help readers quickly grasp your study's core findings and implications.

3.       In the introduction part, it would be beneficial to incorporate references to recent literature to provide context and relevance to your work. Further elucidating your approach's advantages and disadvantages could enhance the introduction's clarity and comprehensiveness.

4.       In Figure 1(a) and (b), the legends obstruct the visualization of the results. It would be beneficial for readability if the authors consider relocating the legends to the top of the figures.

5.       In Table 4, please convert the data (Mean and STD) for references 68, 69, 70, and 71 into your specified format style.

6.       In Table 4, references 68 to 71 are cited, but no explanation is provided in lines 876 to 891 regarding their inclusion. Could you please clarify the significance or context of these references in the table?

 

7.       In line 595, the authors specify a frequency range of 1 GHz to 40 GHz; however, it appears that no results related to these frequency bands are presented in the manuscript. Could the authors clarify or include relevant findings about this frequency range?

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The clarity of English language representation, particularly in the abstract, introduction, and conclusion sections, requires improvement. Enhancing the clarity of expression in these critical sections will ensure that the key insights and contributions of the research are effectively communicated to the reader.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The main concern is centered on the fact that all the results discussed are theoretical or supported by simulation; no experimental results are shown to support the proposal or the conclusions.

The title should directly state the proposal itself.

In the abstract, some acronyms are unnecessarily defined, which are not used in this section. 

Phrases appear in blue, probably from the editing and writing stage of the document.

Multiple ideas discussed in the Introduction should have been supported by references (e.g., the first paragraph).

The main contributions of the research are not explicitly discussed in the Introduction.

The presentation of the system model is required, presenting the scenario and the considerations on which the proposal is evaluated.

The mathematical rigor is deficient, with several errors being made in the presentation of the equations, to mention some examples, see (11), (18), and (27).

The quality of some figures is poor. For example, in terms of resolution, see Figures 2, 3, and 4.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Extensive editing of English language required

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This article proposed emergency IC&T system based on radar foil cloud is described in detail, including the choice of frequency band and modulation method, communication link transmission loss model, data transmission theory, code tracking accuracy theory and anti-multipath model. Firstly, a single-station emergency IC&T model based on radar foil cloud relay is established, and the theories of communication, data transmission and measurement quality analysis are discussed. Secondly, the physical characteristics of the radar foil and the dynamics of the foil cloud are analyzed theoretically, and the corresponding model is established. Finally, the performance of the proposed system in communication and data transmission quality is verified by simulation, including link transmission loss, transmission quality, tracking accuracy and anti-multipath performance. The paper has clear innovation points and is a good paper, but needs to be modified:

1.      In "Introduction" section Related Works, I feel the current coverage of the state of the UAV. is not satisfactory as the related work section does not cover many contributions that likely provide the building blocks of the proposed approach.

For example,

(1) UAV Waypoint Opportunistic Navigation in GNSS-Denied Environments；

(2) LiDAR Depth Cluster Active Detection and Localization for a UAV with Partial Information Loss in GNSS

(3) Cooperative relative localization for UAV swarm in GNSS-denied environment: A coalition formation game approach

(4)An Active Landing Recovery Method for Quadrotor UAV: Localization, Tracking and Buffering Landing。

It is suggested to cite the above articles and analyze the differences in Section Related Works.

 

2.      The letter interpretation after the formula should agree with the format, such as "where" does not need to be followed by ", "and" : ".

3.      The legend requires the normative use of symbols, for example, Figure 1 (a) should be followed by "." Instead of ", ".

4.      The expression of vectors and matrices in the formula should be in bold bold format, please check the full text carefully.

5.      If the other methods in Table 4 do not measure relevant indicators, they should explain or add "-" to the table instead of leaving it empty to improve the reading experience.

6.      There are many grammar errors. Please check English through the paper carefully.

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

There are many grammar errors. Please check English through the paper carefully.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper has been revised according to the review comments and is ready for publication.