Articles | Volume 16, issue 8
https://doi.org/10.5194/amt-16-2089-2023
© Author(s) 2023. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Research article
| Highlight paper
| 
20 Apr 2023
Research article | Highlight paper |
| 20 Apr 2023
| 20 Apr 2023
Evaluation of polarimetric ice microphysical retrievals with OLYMPEX campaign data
Download
- Final revised paper (published on 20 Apr 2023)
- Preprint (discussion started on 13 Jan 2023)
Interactive discussion
Status: closed
Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor
| : Report abuse
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-1488', Anonymous Referee #1, 05 Feb 2023
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Armin Blanke, 13 Mar 2023
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2022-1488', Anonymous Referee #2, 06 Feb 2023
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Armin Blanke, 13 Mar 2023
Peer review completion
AR – Author's response | RR – Referee report | ED – Editor decision | EF – Editorial file upload
AR by Armin Blanke on behalf of the Authors (14 Mar 2023)
Author's response
Author's tracked changes
Manuscript
ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (15 Mar 2023) by Patric Seifert
AR by Armin Blanke on behalf of the Authors (22 Mar 2023)
Manuscript
Line 100-104, is rhohv > 0.7 the only quality control used here for Kdp calculation? Is SNR also been taken into account?
Line 113-115, regarding 2D-S and HVPS probes, did the authors checked for the down times (mostly due to system overload)? Any dual polarimetric signal patterns with the down times of the probes data? And what is the fraction of the down times to the useful time steps during the flight?
Line 245-250, for the RSVP, when RHIs are averaged, since each RHI has its own averaged time steps, is the time difference also interpolated? Also, for gates to gates average, the distance for each gate to the center of vertical profile is different, did the authors used any technique like distance inverse weighting to take this into consideration?