Event-Based Emergency Detection for Safe Drone
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
1) Numeric achievement is missing of your work both in Abstract and conclusion.
2) The novelty of this paper is not very clear. Would you please add the novelty of the work either in abstract or in conclusion which differs from literature?
3) Please review more relevant works and find the research gap from there.
4) A general high level block diagram or framework of complete work in this paper is required to add at the beginning of chapter 3 so that readers can follow up the entire technical work has been done in this paper.
5) What is the meaning of moment of Emergency detection? What is the significance of Time-window check results? Please discuss more about this.
6) Figure 4-c is not a figure, it is table. Please add proper captions for both table and figure in the entire manuscript.
7) Most of the figures do not have axis title and unit. Please add them. Result section is too small. Further experimentation with results are expected.
8) Performance/advantages comparison with existing related works would be good add at the end of result section to validate the capability of the proposed method presented in the paper. Results section should be updated by adding a subsection as “critical analysis and discussion”.
9) Please add impact/significance of this work in real life scenarios.
10) Specific Future research directions are missing. Please add those at the end of conclusions.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper is interesting and fits the journal scope. The TurnItIn similarity index is 23%, which is a good value. However, several issues need to be added before this manuscript can be published. Thus, I recommend a major review.
1. The paper is written in good English. However, some small errors/typos can be found in the text, e.g. "…Numerous statistics r a vast increase…". Those should be corrected.
2. When referring to the fault estimation methods, authors should also mention other approaches like reconfiguration as, e.g.:
[R1] V. Kozak, D. Shevchuk, V. Vovk, and M. Levchenko, "Automation of aircraft control reconfiguration in flight special situations," Proceedings of IEEE 3rd International Conference on Methods and Systems of Navigation and Motion Control, pp. 14-17, October 2014
[R2] Lichota P.: "Multi-Axis Inputs for Identification of a Reconfigurable Fixed-Wing UAV", Aerospace, t. 7(8), Paper 113, 2020
3. Please do not use bold symbols when referring to Figures.
4. When presenting the simulation model, more information must be provided, e.g. what functionalities were included? Was noise taken into account? If so, what was the noise type (process, measurement)? What was the signal-to-noise level? What was the data sampling? What was the frequency at which the microcontroller was able to perform the evaluations?
5. Axes description is missing in Figures 4a, 5a, and 6a.
6. The authors should compare their results with the ones achieved with typical PID controllers.
7. What about the robustness of the proposed method? This must be discussed qualitatively, at least.
For now, this is all for me. I hope that the authors will respond to all those comments.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I have not found any significant changes between the previous version and new new versions of the manuscript. For example, comment 3 was not addressed. Comments 7 and 8 have not been addressed details as expected.
Please go through again each comments and address accordingly.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
In my opinion, the paper is fine.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your supoervision.
And I appolizise for the long revision time.
Round 3
Reviewer 1 Report
1. Please keep the section as 4.6 Discussion rather than 4.6 Results & Discussions various case study should be under Results section.
2. Please add strength and limitation under the discussion section.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
