Please see the attached file.

The manuscript presents a novel setup of ozone lidar using CO₂ Raman tube and its application in several field measurements. The instrument seems to be very promising. The result of the comparison between lidar and vertical measurement was fantastic. Though there are plenty of sloppy writing problems and a few technique questions, current manuscript is worthy to publish. I would recommend a major revision after addressing the following comments.

Comments:

Line 50: ‘Fuel laser‘? Or dye laser?

Line 57: H₂ and D₂

Line 58: Lidar can not be deployed by lidar.

Line 61-65: Please rephrase this sentence.

Line 108: Nd:YAG. The sentence also needs to be improved.

Line 118: Give the reason why 276nm laser can only be used under 600m.

Line 127-129: SO₂ interference should be addressed in detail, here and in section 4.

Line 147: How about the rest power of the pumping laser? Does 266nm laser still exist in the output laser beam?

Line 166-167: Please rephrase this sentence. The reason to use JGS1 quartz should be mentioned.

Line 199: What is the meaning of 4000 laser pulse? Total measurement time?

Line 204: How to determine the statistical error should use more serious statistics. Currently the error estimation method as well as clear conclusion of the estimation are missing. The same for section 4.2.

Line 229: I can not find where the aerosol extinction coefficient is less than 0.3 km^-1 in Fig.7.

Line 236: ‘times’?

Line 251: Something missing before ‘therefore’.

Line 285: Fig.12 is not readable.