I and my students have submitted five papers above, and all of them have been accepted. It is a relatively authoritative specialized journal in the field of astronomical telescope instruments. However, the main impact factor is decreasing rapidly. I feel that the editorial department is doing this as a hobby and does not truly value the improvement of the journal. This is also reflected in the review cycle and logical process. Each cycle is too long, and after experts provide feedback, the editor does not make judgments but directly returns the paper to the reviewer for reevaluation without any restrictions. Currently, we no longer submit papers to this journal mainly because of the long review cycle and the decreasing impact factor.

(2) 讚！ | 小兵222

It is my second article published on this journal, and it is forth article of my team. I feel that it was easy, the comments of experts were also in place. However, the review cycle was too long, it was mainly because the editor responded too slowly and often had to be reminded. The overall result is not bad, and none of my papers has been rejected.

(0) 讚！ | 小兵222

I submitted my paper and waited for about 7 months to receive the review comments. I revised my paper once in 4 months, and then the journal replied that I can either wait or withdraw it. The reviewer's opinion was inaccurate, but my paper was rejected and I could not respond.

(0) 讚！ | 改过自新