A Novel Imaging Scheme of Squint Multichannel SAR: First Result of GF-3 Satellite
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The following comments should be addressed in the revised manuscript.
1) To support the equations used in the manuscript, it would be a good practice if the references could be cited in the text.
2) A reader may be interested in implementing the methodology mentioned in the manuscript. It would be good if the authors could provide the code or mention the software that is used to derive output.
3) The authors are suggested to compare the signal-to-noise ratio in the traditional imaging algorithms and the proposed technique.
4) The authors have proposed a novel imaging scheme for spaceborne SMC-SAR. It is suggested to perform a comparison of other approaches by considering statistical analysis. Only visual interpretation is not an authentic method.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Authors, Well Done! It was my pleasure to read your paper. I only had a few comments on word choices and punctuation. The changes appear in the attached Edited PDF file as comments. One of the figures (figure 1), I think a and b should be on the same page; side by side if possible; that way the information is better presented.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Please see the attached PDF file.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors are suggested to mention in the acknowledgement section the software package or tool that was used in the data processing.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Please see the attached pdf filel.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
