Dear author(s),

In this email, we send you the comments and suggestions from the reviewers.

As per our previous email, please keep in mind that in order for your paper to be
published in any of our listed publications, you will need to revise your paper in
accordance to the comments and suggestions from the reviewers. Full paper should
also be submitted according the templates for its corresponding symposium as
provided in the conference website (http://qir.eng.ui.ac.id/paper-submission/).

We look forward to receiving your revised Conference Paper.

Regards,
QiR 2019 committee

SUBMISSION: 244
TITLE: Multi-phase Missile Guidance for Nonlinear Environment using STT-CAPN
guidance and SMC control

----------------------- REVIEW 1 ---------------------

SUBMISSION: 244
TITLE: Multi-phase Missile Guidance for Nonlinear Environment using STT-CAPN
guidance and SMC control
AUTHORS: Larasmoyo Nugroho

----------- Structure -----------

SCORE: 2 (Fair; Paper is well organized but still needs improvement)
----------- English -----------
SCORE: 1 (Poor; There are many grammatical errors)
----------- Novelty -----------
SCORE: 2 (Fair; Novelty is sufficient and high impact)
----------- Research background -----------
SCORE: 2 (Fair; The rationals for the paper is well grounded based on sufficient
citations)
----------- Analysis -----------
SCORE: 4 (Good; Discussion of the results is comprehensive. Results are not
overgeneralized.)
----------- Referencing -----------
SCORE: 4 (Good; The supporting references is strongly reliable and organized)
----------- Overall review/comment -----------
1. Please follow the AIP format!
2. The abstract is easy to read, although there are still some grammatical errors.
3. The introduction is relatively easy to follow, but--again--you need to improve
your English. There are some grammatical errors found in this section. Other
comments include:
-- I understand that you chose the SMC because it is compatible for the highly
non-linear missile dynamics. I also get that you would like to combine it with the
CAPN, which is usually used in planar guidance laws. However, I did not get very
clearly why you combined those two methods in your study. Would you please
elaborate on this reason more?
+++ i combined those two method bacause capn has ability to target 360 degree
sphere which is ideal for 3d

4. The problem description section is clear. However, some grammatical errors are
still found. Other comments include:
-- Why did you use the MOYAV Beliung missile in this study. You did not mention
the reason. You only mentioned the specification afterward.
+++i choose moyav beliung missile, due to the big wings therefore it is ideal to
make an STT maneuver
5. For the methodology:
-- If the three major steps in the SMC are already mentioned in many previous
studies, I would suggest removing this part. Instead, you can cite those studies.
+++
-- I felt confused while reading the phase-based guidance part. Here, you should
only elaborate on the method. Nonetheless, you also mentioned the reasons. I felt
like reading the introduction part. Putting a reference mentioning the reasons for
this method will be enough.
+++
6. For the results:
-- Why did you design the drone with the written specification? You did not
mention your consideration on this matter. Besides that, the specification of the
drone should be placed in the methods section, so should be the pursuer.
+++
-- I think that the explanation of Figure 10 is still unclear.
+++
7. For the conclusion part:
-- "The experiment shows..."? Do you mean "the simulation"?
+++

----------------------- REVIEW 2 ---------------------

SUBMISSION: 244
TITLE: Multi-phase Missile Guidance for Nonlinear Environment using STT-CAPN
guidance and SMC control
AUTHORS: Larasmoyo Nugroho

----------- Structure -----------

SCORE: 4 (Good; Paper is well organized and easy to follow)
----------- English -----------
SCORE: 2 (Fair; There are a few grammatical errors)
----------- Novelty -----------
SCORE: 2 (Fair; Novelty is sufficient and high impact)
----------- Research background -----------
SCORE: 2 (Fair; The rationals for the paper is well grounded based on sufficient
citations)
----------- Analysis -----------
SCORE: 4 (Good; Discussion of the results is comprehensive. Results are not
overgeneralized.)
----------- Referencing -----------
SCORE: 4 (Good; The supporting references is strongly reliable and organized)
----------- Overall review/comment -----------
text in figure 3, figure 4, figure 6, figure 7, figure 8, figure 10 are unclear,
please revise.
+++

error in explanation of figure 5, written figure 1 instead of figure 5.

+++
what was the software used for the simulation?
+++
is there another algorithm that can be applied to current target and pursuer specs
as comparison to current algorithm?
+++ CAPN vs standard PN