Dear authors,

Referee #2 is pleased with your responses to comments. Referee #1 asks for minor revisions that should be made before the paper is published. With attention to these comments, I expect that the paper will be publishable.

I would also like to mention the comments by David Stevenson, and my own related comments on the first draft ACPD paper. The revisions made in response to Dr. Stevenson's comments were very short, whereas I thought that a broader discussion of your estimated short-term O3 forcing with respect to other studies would be valuable, as well as putting that short-term O3 forcing into context relative to the magnitude of other forcings from other papers. For example, based on other studies, do we expect that the short-term O3 forcing that you estimate is a major or minor component of the overall forcing from aircraft?

Secondly, I thought that the explanation for why the two versions of CAM4 vs CAM5 differ was not very strong, and a short summary explanation would merit inclusion in the abstract or conclusions sections.

The paper can be published addressing the comments of Referee #2, and without addressing the two points that I raise. My own opinion is that the paper will be stronger if more effort can be made to more fully address my two comments above - and I would encourage the authors to make the effort to do so.