Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

see attached file

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment， Thank you!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Broad comments. The authors have made a concise overview of the topic and a brief reference to existing literature. They have indicated the main task of the paper among its motivation. Finally, they have pointed out the key message and the potential benefits of their work. As a general drawback, I would highlight the lack of quantified justification of the problem on hand. Authors should pay attention to enhancing the inner part of their work with relevant tables and/or figures describing the current situation.

Specific comments. In general, the text is very well structured and has clearly defined topics. Some comments for improvement:

1. In sentence 2 there should be a rephrasing […. under all-weather and all-weather conditions….],
2. Figure 16 is very difficult to be read
3. The authors provided a very nice overview of the literature and very interesting results from their pilot tests. Conclusions should highlight the work done and give a summary of both the novelty and the impact of the work. To that end, authors are encouraged to enhance relevant sections.

Author Response

Please see the attachment, Thank you!

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf