Posted on November 14, 2022, just recording it.

(0) 讚！ | xiaohuangwudiii

It has been nearly three months for me as well.

(0) 讚！ | 路遥&宇欣

The status remains unchanged, the editor has not replied either, and there is no place to withdraw the submission.

(0) 讚！ | hrbeuer

The journal is very good, the review speed is very fast, and the reviewers' comments are very pertinent. I wish GRSL continued success! 
Submitted on July 10th, 2022.
Rejected on September 1st, 2022.
Resubmitted on September 10th, 2022.
Revised on October 26th, 2022.
Revised again on November 3rd, 2022.
Accepted on November 11th, 2022.

(0) 讚！ | enjoyxiong

How is it now?

(0) 讚！ | 路遥&宇欣

Yes, it is still undergoing review. There was no reply to yesterday's reminder email.

(0) 讚！ | hrbeuer

Is your still Undergoing Review?

(2) 讚！ | 小囊国

Do you have any comments on the review? It has been rejected for so long.

(2) 讚！ | 小囊国

Posted on June 27th, and still have not received a response for the first review. Just sent a follow-up email, praying now.

(0) 讚！ | hrbeuer

7.31投稿 translates to "July 31 submission" in English.
11.3 reject translates to "November 3 rejection" in English.

(2) 讚！ | sjr4

xd, may I ask what direction you are working in?

(0) 讚！ | ls_Freedom

xd, have you got any results yet? I have also been waiting for almost two months, and still haven't received any results.

(0) 讚！ | ls_Freedom

In the field of remote sensing, GRSL is considered a highly recognized journal. The submission was made in mid-July, and after two months, the first review was completed with minor revisions. The revised version was submitted in early October, and after two weeks, the second review with minor revisions was completed. The next day, the paper was submitted again, and three days later, it was accepted.

(1) 讚！ | ayuyu

Wishing GRSL to get better and better.

(2) 讚！ | 小杨同学

Capital U and R

(2) 讚！ | 小囊国

It has been two and a half months since I submitted it, and it has been undergoing review all along. Does anyone know what's going on? I cannot reach the editor either. Should I send it for external review in this situation? It would be embarrassing if it turns out that it was never sent for external review...

(2) 讚！ | 小囊国

5.26 First submission
6.26 Re-submission after rejection. Reviewer 1 raised several professional questions, and Reviewer 2 raised a few minor issues.
9.06 Second submission
10.11 Re-submission after rejection. Reviewer 1 still had doubts about the answers and a new reviewer was added, who had a very positive opinion.
10.26 Third submission. Added some experimental details and provided a positive response to Reviewer 1's comments.
10.28 Received acceptance email.
Overall, the journal is quite good, and the reviewers' comments are relevant. However, the associate editor is rather strange.

(2) 讚！ | giermeng

Second GRSL article, submitted one month after the first article.
Submitted on May 23rd.
Received first review on July 10th, with two reviewers. The first reviewer had 6 questions, and the second reviewer had 12 questions. Requested a one-week extension to make revisions.
Revised on August 4th.
Received second review on August 24th. The first reviewer had one lingering question, and the second reviewer raised three additional questions. They also delved into four more questions regarding our previous responses. They suggested that we improve the writing, and the editor also recommended the same. They also asked for proof of the improvements. Helplessly, we made the necessary improvements. Although the second reviewer had many questions, they were clear and guided us on how to make the modifications. The first reviewer's question was vague, and although their attitude seemed good, we still took their question seriously and replied carefully.
Revised on August 31st.
Received feedback on September 8th. The second reviewer was satisfied with our response. The first reviewer had a strong attitude and insisted on their viewpoint. Unfortunately, our manuscript was rejected and had to be resubmitted. (According to our field of submission, the first reviewer did not consider a factor that others mentioned, but they insisted we consider it.) There was no other choice but to redo the experiments.
Resubmitted on September 13th.
Finally accepted on October 7th. Despite the twists and turns, the outcome was still good.

(0) 讚！ | wolfdarling

Hello, I would like to ask. Will the review process be faster in another journal after transferring?

(0) 讚！ | lin jh

I often come here to check for journal information, so let me also provide the submission process. 
Submitted on April 22nd,
Received reviewer comments on July 6th, with one accepting and one rejecting. Rejected and resubmitted.
Conducted additional experiments and added content on August 15th. Replied to both reviewers' comments and resubmitted.
Reviewer 2 was satisfied with the response on October 2nd, and accepted the submission.

(0) 讚！ | wolfdarling

Me too. It's been two and a half months already.

(0) 讚！ | qwe123

U and R in uppercase, Undergoing Review.

(0) 讚！ | splitthelark

Second review: Reviewer 1 retains question 1, and then suggests resubmission after rejection, with a return within three months.

(3) 讚！ | Nature后备队

Brother, may I ask if you are undergoing review or Undergoing Review? I submitted on July 19th and I am in the same situation as you, except mine is Undergoing Review.

(0) 讚！ | qwe123

2022. 7.14 Manuscript submitted
2022. 10.12 Revisions Required (21 Days)
2022. 11.01 Revision submitted
2022. 11.29 Revisions Required (21 Days)
2022. 12.03 Revision submitted
2023. 01.03 Accepted

Translation:
2022. 7.14 Manuscript submitted
2022. 10.12 Revisions Required (21 Days)
2022. 11.01 Revision submitted
2022. 11.29 Revisions Required (21 Days)
2022. 12.03 Revision submitted
2023. 01.03 Accepted

(0) 讚！ | splitthelark