|Doddi et al. provide a manuscript about the IDEAL measurement campaign. The IDEAL program and the associated campaign target a very relevant and interesting topic of atmospheric research, which is the structure of the lower troposphere in strongly stable conditions. New ways of sampling stability and turbulence with multiple UAS were explored in the campaign which could contribute significantly to a better understanding of the dynamics under such conditions.|
The authors have revised the manuscript according to reviewer comments. It would have been easier to review the revised manuscript if a marked-up manuscript or a list of changes would have been provided as typically requested by AMT. It has not been clearly stated in the authors responses which changes were made, so a full review of the revised manuscript had to be made. Given the substantial changes that were made this was probably necessary in any case.
From my perspective, the manuscript has been improved significantly from the previous version. Nevertheless there are three major points which I think should be addressed before acceptance for publication in AMT and some minor comments:
- Table 2: The authors should carefully revise the accuracy and resolution values that are given in this table and distinguish between laboratory or theoretical values and validated uncertainties in field experiments (incl. references).
- Methods: The authors refer to the doctoral thesis Doddi 2021 for many of the methods. The reference that is given is not traceable, no DOI, no book reference. It might be my fault that i cannot access the full text, but at this point I cannot judge if the presented results are fully traceable.
- Section 4: A series of plots are provided that show processed data from the UAS flights (Figs.10-19). Not all of the plots are discussed and it is questionable if they are relevant to the goals of the manuscript. In any case the authors should make clear, what the message of Section 4 is and clearly describe the findings with observations that are shown in the figures. This has improved and is maybe acceptable for Figs. 10-13, but especially for the new figures with regards to the spatial sampling, the description is very vague.
- p.1, l.4f: I think that references should be omitted in the abstract
- p.1, l.16: "Atmospheric modeling motivated by IDEAL observations is reported elsewhere" That is a rather odd statement. Is it relevant in the abstract, if it is reported "elsewhere"?
- p. 7, l. 154f: Although a time constant of 0.5 miliseconds and 800 Hz sampling rate might be technically correct for the coldwire sensors, how realistic are these characteristics? Is there a reference that shows that noise-free measurements are possible with a given resolution of 0.003 K in flight? Same applies to the hot wire. Spectra in Fig. 9 show significant noise from 100 Hz.
- p.8, Table 2: 0.01% is not a realistic noise-free resolution for the SHT sensor.
- p.13, l.239f: How did the changing atmospheric features result in aircraft sorties? Maybe rephrase?
- p.13, l.240: In the author response it is written that wind speeds that exceed 20 m/s are frequently observed above 3000 m and are the limit for operation and here 15 m/s are given. Please just clarify what are the operational limits and why the 3000 m are set.
- p. 18, Table 3: I think the table is very helpful and informative, but maybe the full table could go to the appendix.
- p.19, l.265: It is uncommon to state whose doctoral thesis a reference is in the text. Just give the reference. However, the reference that is given links to a preview-website, which does not give the full text. I cannot access it.
- p.19, l.265: "was ?? to the DH2"
- p.19, l.266f: "accurate up to 0.05 m/s": Table 2 claims a resolution of 0.05 m/s and accuracy of 0.5 m/s. I think an accuracy of 0.05 m/s is quite unrealistic, considering the uncertainty of all the involved measurements.
- p.19, Fig. 9 and l.275ff: To my understanding, these are spectra of single time series with a length of 5 seconds. Averaged spectra would be interesting to see the characteristics of the sensor with less noise. Are these so-called artifacts systematic or random?
- p.24, l.288f: There is a verb missing in this sentence.
Figures 11 & 13: What do the thick and thin lines represent in the dissipation rate and Ct2 plots? It should be mentioned in the caption.
- p.31, ll. 336ff: These statements should go into a "Data availability" section.