Alex Clay Cushley

Royal Military College of Canada · Department of Physics and Space Science

I recently became aware of this paper, which plagiarized one of my previous publications.

I left a comment on the RG article, contacted the authors of the paper and the editor @Alexei V. Dmitriev who replied, "I did not find too much plagiarism in the paper in the sense of “text much”. The main problem I found was that the authors did not cite the original technique of Cushley and Noel (2014) as well as other relevant papers. Unfortunately, this happens sometimes because of reviewer oversight."

It seems that the editors are not taking this complaint seriously. I would have expected the editors to be horrified that they published plagiarized materials and remove the paper. What else can I do? I have also informed Wiley, the publisher of the original Radio Science paper I wrote, since this clearly violates the copy-rights to the original paper:

Cushley, A. C., and J.-M. Noël (2014), Ionospheric tomography using ADS-B signals, Radio Sci., 49, 549–563,doi:10.1002/2013RS005354

What else can I do?

UPDATE:

The authors of the paper are cooperating and I was contacted by the Editorial Board of the paper to inform me they requested to revise or retract their paper. See my comment below for the course taken to resolve this issue.

The AGM-114 Hellfire missile has a tail control surfaces. Tail control is best for high angle-of- attack (AOA) and for air-to-air whereas the AGM-114 is an air-to-ground missile mostly launched at ground targets from an effective range of 8-11 miles (depends on variant). Does anyone know how this discrepancy can be explained?

When a shaped charge detonates there is a jet component and a slug. It is my understanding that the jet is a high temperature, high pressure flow of molten metal that erodes the targets armor, whereas the slug is like a cork or plug to direct the flow into the target rather for maximum penetration. A colleague told some of the students that it is a misconception that the jet is molten metal and that it is really solid metal because it doesn't have time to change phase and acts like a super fluid. Is the jet resulting from a shaped charge molten metal or solid?

I have found different characteristic values given for the standoff distance to achieve optimal jet formation and therefore penetration using a shaped charge. Walter and Zukas give 2-4 cone diameters. Another plot I saw peaked at 60 cm for a 10 cm CD and the acceptable range was 2-6 CD. Is there an equation to determine the optimum theoretical standoff distance for a shaped charge? I suspect such an equation would take into account the cone liner material, density, mass ratio to explosive material to liner, liner thickness, etc. What is the optimum standoff distance for a shaped charge to achieve maximum penetration?

For a radial charge geometry in a solid rocket, is there an equation or rule of thumb to determine the minimum hole size in the solid propellant charge? I suspect the answer is "no" since an infinitesimally small hold diameter would result in an axial burn geometry, OR that it is relates to the Web Fraction: bf = b / r, where Web Thickness (b) is the minimum thickness of the grain to burning surface or casing, and r is the grain radius.

NASA's unmanned X-34 shcramjet demonstration sub-orbital aircraft is air-launched from Orbital Sciences Corp.’s L-1011, a commercial jetliner originally modified to carry the company’s expendable Pegasus launch vehicle. I understand that shcramjet engines need to be boosted to supersonic velocity before they start to work, but I am wondering, "why they are air-launched rather than boosted using a rocket from the ground?"

I suspect it has something to do with reducing vibrations and g-forces on instruments and sensors, or concurrently demonstrating reusable launch vehicle technology, other than the Pegasus, which is considered expendable. I am wondering about the cost difference as well.

I am teaching a course and came across applications of inductors in remote detonating systems, detonators and fuzes like the FMU-143 penatrating bomb fuze system, but I have not found much information on how excatly they are used.

I assume they are used as isolation transformers for safety reasons but would like to know more. For example, " The flux compression generator is one alternative to capacitors. When fired, it creates a strong electromagnetic pulse, which is inductively coupled into one or more secondary coils connected to the bridge wires or slapper foils. "

I think this would be an interesting example for my students (especially since I am at a military College). Any information and references would be appreciated.

Thank you in advance for your contributions.

The title sounds interesting but the goal seems far too general.

I was reading this article from 1974 and wondered whether others felt like the list of considerations that led to the most appropriate journal to publish in has changed drastically.

Herbert Inhaber, Is there a pecking order in physics journals? Physics Today 27, 5, 39 (1974); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3128587.

" There is the matter of audience; of the probable delay between acceptance and publication; of article format (letter, review, standard research report). If the article is potentially controversial, the author may estimate its chances of being accepted by different journals. Considerations of national pride may sway the choice: An author may submit a work to a journal in his own country rather than to one that has a greater circulation and impact but is published in a foreign country. "

Personally, I usually gravitate to submitting to the same journal that most of my references are from since that would likely be the most relevant audience. I have never published in a Canadian journal, but have reviewed articale submitted to the Canadian Journal of Physics and noticed many authors from countries that lack reputable journals will submit manuscripts to North American and European journals, particularly those with little or no publication fees. I don't think time between submission to publication is relevant at all with the internet, online publishing or pre-prints and self-publishing sites like arxiv.org.

I am very interested what others think. In particular, what do you think is the most important consideration today: impact factor, open access, immediacy, publication cost, or something else?

Thank you in advance for your contributions to this discussion!

What is the highest critical frequency f0F2 ever recorded? Is anyone aware of a paper/reference or published ionogram for the reflection of 50 MHz (or higher) radio waves by the Ionosphere at incidence?

"At incidence, generally frequencies below 10 MHz are reflected but with active events frequencies up to 50 MHz and higher may also be reflected by the E-layer."

Thank you for your contributions in advance!

Best regards,

Alex

I just read the following article from Physics Today called Commentary: On the quality and costs of science publication:

https://physicstoday.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/PT.3.4259

I think this article echos some of the concerns for scientific publication, particularly the trad-offs between cost and quality. I started another discussion about 2 months ago looking for a journal in my field with a reasonably high impact factor, but low (or no) publication costs because the availability of funds for this coming year are uncertain..

If I don't have the funds for high quality pay-to-publish journals like AGU, is it better to use a preprint server like arXiv.org (or even Research Gate), or to publish in low impact free journals? Furthermore, should we as scientists be making a conscious and concerted effort to move away from pay-to-publish journals to improve the access to publishing and quality science?

Hello,

I have a research paper in preparation but am uncertain whether I will have enough funds available to publish in the journal that I usually publish in (Radio Science). The topic is Ionospheric Tomography Using Signals of Opportunity.

What would be a reputable free alternative? I found Advances in Radio Science (ARS) but there is a limit on the length and my paper is currently about 10-16k words with 17-20 figures.

Best regards,

Alex