Dear Authors,

We are in receipt of the comments form the 2 Referees.
They both think you have adequately addressed their comments in the revised version of the manuscript.
Nevertheless, they still think some minor revisions are necessary.
See below for details.
Looking forward to receiving the final revised version of your manuscript.

Thanks and Best Regards,
Laura Bianco

Associate Editor AMT

===========

Referee #1:

The authors have addressed and incorporated my comments and suggestions in their revised Version. During my final Reading I just found some minor Points:
in lines 45, 166 and 169, I would prefer to have a comma upfront "respectively", but this might be an issue that the editor should finally decide on
line 113: insert "," after "needed"
line 162: insert "the" before "fine-scale"
line 235: replace "simulations" by "simulation"
line 363: "Lidar" should be lower case "lidar" as in the rest of the manuscript
line 406: either "coefficients in use" or "coeficcients used"
Reference Koch: journal name missing

===========

Referee #2:

In the revised version of the manuscript “The CopterSonde: An Insight into the Development of a Smart UAS for Atmospheric Boundary Layer Research” by A. R. Segales et al., the authors have adequately addressed my concerns about the original version of the manuscript. I have a few minor edits that need to be addressed prior to publication:
Line 27: Text cut off
Line 165: I suggest rephrasing “ the inherent motor wash makes a big limitation” to “ the inherent motor wash causes a big limitation”
Line 170: Clarify at what frequency the wind vane mode algorithm is calculating the wind vector
Line 329-330: What are “good GPS conditions”?
Line 331: In this context, the word “anytime” is two words
Figure 10: Include color scale on hodograph.
Line 365: Rephrase “rose new design ideas”
Line 394: Change “get” to “obtain”