Coast–Ship Bistatic HF Surface Wave Radar: Simulation Analysis and Experimental Verification

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I believe that this article deserves publishing after the remarks listed below are taken into the consideration by the authors.

Quality of English language needs to be significantly improved. I advise authors to pay attention to the details during presentation of their work. For example, figures from 10 to 15 have title written in chinese language. Provide more details regrading the used HFSWR. Either extend the section 4.1. or provide reference to the publication where the HFSWR is described in more detail.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear  Sir or Madam,

The theoretical part of your article is clear and corresponds to the well-known theory developed by Barrick et al. and Gill et al. Your simulations seem to be coherent with this classical theory. The main interest of your paper lies in the experimental data in bistatic configurations. This justifies in large part my recommendation for publishing. However, for a physical point of view, CTSR and STCR are two equivalent bistatic configuration if similar antennas are used. Your contribution should be further developed, a statistical study for instance, to really point out the advantages of STCR vs CTSR. So I suggest to add some slight moderation or attenuation in your presentation, especially in the conclusion.

Best regards.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

This manuscript gives some preliminary simulations and experimental results for coast–ship bistatic HFSWR. Of course, coast-ship bistatic HFSWR is of interest to HF radar community.However, there are many mistakes and unclear points in the paper. In particular:

Abstract needs to be significantly improved. There isn’t a Dirac delta function in (8). How can (8) be simplified to (9)? I think that the results in Fig.3-5 are wrong. The two first-order peaks are symmetric. I doubt it. Formula （1） is wrong. The derivation process of formula （1）-（15）is tediously long and not rigorous. Line221,cosmic is cosine, etc.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

The manuscript has been revised. However, in the part of basic theory and simulation, some results and conclusions are confusing and may be wrong, which needs further study. In addition, only some R-D spectra and D-T spectra are showed. The analysis is simple, and it excludes the magnitude of the first-order and second-order signals.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx