Application and Accuracy of Unmanned Aerial Survey Imagery after Salvage Logging in Different Terrain Conditions
, Kristijan Tomljanović 2,*, Milivoj Franjević 2, David Janeš 1, Ivan Žarković 1 and Ivica Papa 1,*
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
My comments:
1. abstract, please explain GCP term and also add one or two sentences as a introdcution for abstract.
2. introdcution, please add more papers for scientific knowledge analysis. What is a novelty of paper? What is a contribution of paper?
3. conclusion, please add information about obtained results from research test.
4. references, add more papers.
Author Response
Reviewer 1
Thank you for all your comments.
- abstract, please explain GCP term and also add one or two sentences as a introdcution for abstract.
Abstract has been rewritten according to your and Editor’s suggestion. The term GCP was explained.
- introdcution, please add more papers for scientific knowledge analysis. What is a novelty of paper? What is a contribution of paper?
More papers were added. The contribution and novelty of the paper has been more elaborated in the text.
- conclusion, please add information about obtained results from research test.
Corrected.
- references, add more papers.
Corrected.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
- This study digitized the harvested area using UAV and total station. - This study is meaningful for precise monitoring of the target site. - But I can't find anything new in the study. A lot of research on the number of GCPs required to obtain a high RMSE in a specific space has been conducted in the past. - Even if the results derived from the target site are applied to other logging areas as they are, there are many things to consider. - It is recommended to conduct research from a monitoring perspective by continuously establishing DEM and DSM in the area.
Author Response
Reviewer 2
Thank you for all your comments.
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors,
the paper seems to be an empirical comparative study of three different technologies, the performance of which is already known from the operating specifications, ar reported. The study lack in originality and an adequate proposed methodology. Therefore, I believe it does not fit the standard of the journal and you should consider it for a different editorial placement.
Author Response
Reviewer 3
Thank you for all your comments.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
This is the same as the previously presented opinion.
The revised manuscript also does not change much.
