The article was submitted in March 2019. The revision comments of the first review were received in March 2020. The revision was submitted in May, and the comments of the second review hasn’t been returned. During the period, I urged the editor for several time but received no reply. The submission experience is extremely poor, and it is not recommended to submit.

(9) Thank | reznov

The quality used to be very high, and the articles before 2013 were very valuable. A considerable number of domestic people who have articles published in this journal were later academicians, outstanding youths, and excellent youths. However, the journal later self-indulged and published some special issues of international conferences with low value unscrupulously. The income was directly taken by some of the associate editors, which led to the decline of impact factor. In the past two years, the impact factor has been restored through the efforts of the editor-in-chief, but the journal has lost considerable skill and reputation. Therefore, at present, mainstream academic teams rarely publish very cutting-edge articles on JNAV. However, it is worth mentioning that because the journal has a good quality in history, the overall editorial board lineup is very luxurious, and they are all relevant leaders in the domestic and international navigation fields.

(3) Thank | zarathustr

I think I still have to share my dramatic experience of submission to this journal. I submitted it to Journal of Navigation in December last year. The major revision was recommended for the first review in two and a half months, the minor review was recommended for the second review in two months and the reviewer had already recommended publication. When I was so happy that I thought of acceptance, the editor-in-chief suddenly said that the repetition rate was very high. 32%, okay, it was very high indeed. But the rate I checked was about 13%. After I modified it later, I checked it on the crosscheck platform of Elsevier and it was only 7%. After the revision, the editor-in-chief still said that the repetition rate was high. Was it still 32%, excuse me??? I thought that the editor checked the repetition rate of the manuscript including the reference at the end of the article, so I asked about the situation and attached the repetition rate report during the fourth revision. The editor-in-chief rejected it directly a month and a half later. Although I understood that the editor-in-chief rejected this kind of manuscript with a high repetition rate, why did you tell me until the last minute? After all, I had argued with the reviewers for nearly six months. The editor-in-chief had not answered the author’s concerns positively but said that repetition rate was high... In addition, this journal changed its current editor-in-chief in July. The reminder letter and inquiry letter were never returned, which delayed me a lot of time. I hope everyone could weigh and consider when submitting... My submission experience is extremely poor.

(10) Thank | zhy_无名小卒

The quality of the review is not high, and the speed is not fast. After spending two months of revising my manuscript, I waited a month to receive a response. I haven’t seen it yet, and the speed is really slow!!! I do not recommend submitting to this journal.

(2) Thank | infi

It has been almost a year since the employment, and the publication seems to be far away. Recently, the number of articles published has decreased, which is not a good sign.

(0) Thank | v雪狐

Just submitted my application, I feel scared. May I ask if the landlord has hired anyone now?

(0) Thank | chenhao112

I heard that the journal, which used to be very popular, is now only a mediocre one. The reviewing process is entirely based on the editor's mood, taking one to three months for the first revision and currently two months for the second revision. There is no news at all, and the interface only shows "under review" since submission, with no information about the reviewing stage. Sending emails to inquire is equivalent to not sending them at all. The experience is extremely poor!

(133) Thank | v雪狐

February 22 submission, August 23 first review opinion, September 9 revised draft return, October 23 second review opinion, November 26 revised draft return, January 10, 2018 accepted.

(2) Thank | jlulxg

has been submitted for 12 months, and there is no news yet

(0) Thank | weer

6 is submitted in the month, and the review is given in December.The result of the manuscript, returning after the overhaul in March, the acceptance within one week, the publication date is unknown

(1) Thank | Anonymous

Review draft for 4 months to review results, modify and return to the same day to accept

(1) Thank | Anonymous