How to get published manuscript in Q1 Scopus journals?
I am finding difficulties while publishing one of my manuscript related to Maintenance Engineering. I worked very hard through out entire Year on this, and I believe that this manuscript will be very helpful and informative to any readers belong to Maintenance Engineering domain. I have submitted this in to renowned Journals but it's not been accepted. I have also updated the information as per reviewer's, However I am not satisfied with their comments.
You don't say the reasons why reviewers rejected your article. Even if you are not satisfied with their comments, it is advisable to correct your article according to the recommendations of the reviewers because you do not hold the truth or part of the truth.
If you give the exact reasons for the rejection, the readers of this platform can help you improve the quality of your article and give you the right advice.
I have published abundantly and most of the time I strictly follow the comments and requests from reviewers.
The fact that somebody detected something, should be enough for you to understand that something is not clear. Very often, authors don't realize that reviewers, as well as future readers of your paper, are not mind-readers, and they don't know something that is very clear to you because it is in your mind, or because for you they are crystal clear, and that everybody knows them.
For instance, don't use acronyms without previously explaining what they are, or words or techniques that are technical like resilience, symbolic regression, or iron-carbon equilibrium diagram, without a brief explanation of their meaning and procedure.
You don't have to accept blindly what reviewers say; many times they may be natural and normal ignorance on the specific subject you wrote, or because it is not clearly expressed, and then you have to answer the reviewers that it is not as they say
I understand your concern. And I also believe in continual improvement. I have actually updated and made necessary changes to my manuscript as per Reviewer's comments, please refer my comments again. However, in the second resubmission the Reviewers comments were found to be unjustified. I don't want to further share their feedbacks as it is not ethically correct. My point of concern is waiting for 2-3 months for 2-3 times for its review and getting unjustified comments with rejection is not appropriate. Every reviewers has their own thinking and understanding. How many times you should consider this revision? As you can't satisfy to all. In my opinion, the chief editor of Journal should look into this matter of serious concern. There should be some ways and means to trace the records of updation before accepting for review into next journals. In this way, the quality of paper will be enhanced.
Digital transformation is one of the critical drivers of change in aviation as in many areas. Aviation operations are always aimed to be carried out with a high degree of safety and security standards. Efficient aircraft maintenance management makes a significant contribution to meeting these standards. The digital revolution offers excellent oppor...