Next Article in Journal
Special Issue on Selected Papers from the “International Symposium on Remote Sensing 2018”
Previous Article in Journal
Comparative Study on Variable Selection Approaches in Establishment of Remote Sensing Model for Forest Biomass Estimation
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Remote Sensing
Volume 11
Issue 12
10.3390/rs11121438
Review Report
remotesensing-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
Letter
Peer-Review Record

Spaceborne GNSS-R Observation of Global Lake Level: First Results from the TechDemoSat-1 Mission

Remote Sens. 2019, 11(12), 1438; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11121438
by Liwen Xu 1,2, Wei Wan 1,*, Xiuwan Chen 1,2, Siyu Zhu 3, Baojian Liu 1 and Yang Hong 1
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Reviewer 4: Anonymous
Reviewer 5: Anonymous
Remote Sens. 2019, 11(12), 1438; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11121438
Submission received: 24 May 2019 / Revised: 9 June 2019 / Accepted: 15 June 2019 / Published: 18 June 2019

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript is the resubmission of the mc remotesensing-482910. For this reviewer, the authors have significantly improved the quality of the mc in both scientific and presentation points of view. I thus recommend to publish as is.


Only one minor comment: the RECEIVER BANDWIDTH of the TDS-1 GNSS-R instrument should be ~2 MHz.

Author Response

We have corrected the value of the 'RECEIVER BANDWIDTH'. Thanks.

Reviewer 2 Report

Authors have answered all the questions to my satisfaction. I do not have further comments.

Author Response

Thanks for your approval.

Reviewer 3 Report

Thank you for your corrections

Author Response

Thanks for your approval.

Reviewer 4 Report

The paper has much improved from the original version. The filtering is better explained. One main question remains for me: could the authors provide the percentage of points filtered out when equation (4) is applied ? This is important for me to understand whether or not the results of the paper are compromised by such filtering. I would recommend the paper for publication pending of the answer to this question. Therefore I have selected Accept with Minor Revision below.

Author Response

We provided two tables (i.e., Table R1 for Year 2015, and Table R2 for Year 2016) for statistics when applying Equation (4). Please see attachment.

The mean percentage of the remaining points is 70%, which is a generally satisfied value. However, the number of outliers seems random. E.g., for several overlapped lakes (like lake IDs=2, 10, and 142), the percentages are high in one year but low in the other year; whilst for several overlapped lakes (like lake IDs=5 and 6), the percentages are similar for both years. Probably the data for some tracks are just bad. Due to length limitation of this letter, we did not do in-depth analyses for this issue. We will investigate more TDS-1 and/or CYGNSS data to explain this issue in future studies.


Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 5 Report

see attached

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop