Review of an article submitted to the conference

Approval status: Accept without acknowledging of remarks
Date Published: 11.11.2018 - 13:43
The article's title reflects the content and purpose of the article? 
Was the aim of the work clearly defined and successfully accomplished? 
Does the article embrace contemporary issues in the area? 
Does the article contain new and not published results? 
I do not know
Was the article clearly written and easily understood? 
Easily understood
Conclusions illustrate the research results, recommendations and giving suggestions for future research 
The references are full and grounded? 
How adequate was the writing and used terminology? 
Remarks and suggestions to the authors of the article 

Dear authors! The paper covers an important contemporary topic and contains some useful analysis of UAV controllers.You also suggest "the optimal configuration for price and quality that will fully meet the needs of the pilot". We can conclude that the paper has some practical value.

However, the paper lacks serious theorethical analysis. The scientific output is also questionable. Comparison of your findings with industry's well-known solutions as well as deeper study of controller characteristics would add value to your research. 

I confirm that there is no conflict of interests regarding reviewed article. 
I have read this submission. I believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have insignificant reservations, as outlined above.