The authors have made substantial revisions to their paper in
response to the critical reviewers comments. This includes the addition
of three new authors. I have sent the submission back to one of the reviewers
who was willing to perform a second review. Their comments are below. Following the small modifications proposed by the reviewer, I think the
paper is now ready for acceptance.

Comments from reviewer
I had read the authors' response to my comments a few weeks ago on the website, and everything looked acceptable to me. They have put significant effort into improving both the text and figures.
Plus I have re-read the manuscript today. I noticed that there are three new co-authors who have done the numerical simulations, which is also great. The new title also bears this out.
So, all in all, the authors have risen to the challenged and produced a worthy paper. However, a few "easy" items would seem to need attention.

In section 2.2, the inner and outer model domain sizes need to be stated i.e. in km x km. Also, do they mean "lateral boundary conditions" when referring to "lateral conditions" ?

The conclusions do not finish with a statement of future work e.g. how could use of UAVs be enhanced in a new field campaign in conjunction with other in-situ and remote-sensing equipment ? The use of UAVs is still new, so there must be plenty of potential for measuring turbulence alone.