Long Baseline Tightly Coupled DGNSS Positioning with Ionosphere-Free Inter-System Bias Calibration
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
A new DGNSS model is proposed with ISB calibration in this manuscript. The contents are concise and informative and would be interested to readers.
Line 57-58: Correct me if I am wrong. For my understanding, the iono-weighted model is considering the iono corrections in a stochastic way. That's why it is called 'weighted'. The deterministic way is called 'iono-fixed model'.
Line 63: Be careful to use 'the best'. I believe the IF or uncombined model has its own advantages and drawbacks. Besides, if you would like to use the IF model, you'd better add the Melbourne-Wűbbena combination for a rigorous sense. You can refer to some of Prof. Teunissen's manuscripts.
Line 75: Have you defined BDS and GPS?
Line 112: Do you mean the differential tropospheric delay.
Line 145: What is $\overline{dt}$?
Line 224: The label sticks are not always consistent.
Line 239: Typo error.
Line 273-275: Please rephrase these two sentences, especially cannot do what?
Line 316: Has or have.
Line 405: A verb is missing.
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
Thanks very much for your valuable comments and suggestions to our manuscript. Please see the attachment.
Your Sincerely
Chao Jiang
Author Response File: 
Author Response.doc
Reviewer 2 Report
Throughout the paper, there were consistent English grammatical mistakes as well as some needed detail in the introduction to explain what is exactly meant by "station-between code DGNSS" and "system diversity" as well as "model strength."
Secondly, the logic in the second half of paragraph 3 in the introduction does not follow. By saying the "other one is the ionosphere weighted model or ionosphere-free (IF)," this implies that these are two names for the same method which then it is stated that the "weighted model is only suitable for the shor or medium baseline case." Thus, I assume you mean to say that there are three models and IF is the third and not limited by baseline length.
Besides the grammatical errors, the method presented in this paper is straightforward and whose primary replication is from previous work which is suitably referenced in the introduction. I believe that this paper would, however, benefit from more in-depth statistical results when assessing the ISB, most likely from larger/longer data sets for some of the ISB claims put forth in the paper.
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
Thanks very much for your valuable comments and suggestions to our manuscript. Please see the attachment.
Your Sincerely
Chao Jiang
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
