Dear Dr Ojha,

I have received two largely positive reviews of the revised version of your manuscript. One of the reviewers recommends acceptance of the paper as is, the other requests some minor revisions. In detail, the referee # 1 states (no further comments from referee # 3):
Authors have made a sincere effort to improve the manuscript and possible suggestions have been adopted. They have compared model simulations with other observations. Manuscript has been improved. But WRF-CHEM model has its limitations. Cumulus parameterization and PBL Schemes have limitations in reproducing the monsoon convection. I think authors should clearly mention this in the conclusions.
Asian summer monsoon is a large scale phenomenon. In order to understand convective transport, it is essential that WRF-CHEM model should be able to simulate lower level convergence and upper level divergence. I suggest authors to add a figure showing OLR and 850 hPa winds during monsoon season. Compare this with AGCM results and then clearly state limitations of WRF-Chem in simulating monsoon convection.
A figure depicting vertical distribution of cloud droplet number concentration and ice crystal number concentration, averaged over south peninsula (10-20N), will be helpful in depicting model's ability/inability in reproducing convective transport from boundary layer to upper troposphere. Readers should be aware limitations as well.
++++ End of report

I would like to encourage you to consider the reviewer's comments carefully and resubmit a revised version of your paper, including some discussion on the abilities and limitations of the WRF-CHEM model.

Sincerely,
Gabriele Stiller