Dear Authors,

Thank you for revising the manuscript.

The referees find that the manuscript is OK to published now.
However, there are some minor issues I would like to point out
before the publication of the manuscript.

The language part has to be improved.
Although there will be a copy-editing, you style of writing will not be changed.
Therefore, please go through the article few times and correct the parts which
are not legible.

Many thanks and Best regards,
Jayan


Some suggestions are given below:

Line 33-39: both sentences coveys the same message
Line 53: redistribute
Line 53: constituents,
Line 62: not “many authors”, but give references
Line 65: delete somewhat
Line 66: horizontal gradients of what?
Line 69: reasons for the differences in modeled projections of future climate
Line 73: are needed.
Line 74: The present work is ….Please rephrase this sentence.
Line 77: observe the CVS
Line 79: coverage. Lidars
Line 80: efficient in
Line 85: have some limitations in using the analyses presented in this study. Rewrite the sentence something like this. Please note that all instruments have some advantages and disadvantages. No need to project demerits of any instrument.
Line 98: You are not using images, but the data.
Line 100: radar. That is,
Line 103: previous studies, not researchers
Line 104: what is “credible”? better accuracy?
Line 110-111: the sentence is not required. Else start with a sentence “Some other methods have also been developed to …” or something similar
Line 129: delete as
Line 133: deriving CVS
Line 138: The objective of this study is to examine..
Line 148: data are
Line 151: write something like “In general, the balloons are not launched during moderate and heavy rain …”
Line 153: The RH profiles
Line 155: from April 2006 to
Line 157: put condition?
Line 159: the total number of profiles was 3251.
Line 164: every three hours
Line 164: from Dec.2010
Line 167: Several methods are employed to determine
Line 175: for the levels with
Line 184, 186: split the sentences instead of using “ ; “
Line 199: poor results
Line 199: lower perfect?
Line 203: good results or reasonable results, not good enough results
Line 203: 53.9% is the perfect agreement?
Line 205: delete “and we provide ..”
Line 210: it is better to use “two adjacent layers”
Line 214: to 12.5 km
Line 230: “Here, CVS is examined ...”
Line 233-234: Therefore, we did not compare with the ground-based LIDAR measurements with ….
Change lines 236—237 also in a similar way.
Line 234: ground-based
Line 239: delete “Unfortunately”
Line 247: “accurate” is a strong word in this context
Line 254: figure 3 (a-d) shows
Line 258: Hence, the CVS
Line 270: Delete only
Line 273: about 53%
Line 276: from evening to mid-night
Line 281: and post-monsoon
Line 285: lower temperatures, not cooler
Line 286: significant seasonal variation
Line 287: but significant seasonal differences are observed in the lower stratosphere. Write something like this
Line 292: “easterlies are observed” use something similar
Line 292, 299: above that altitude? Be specific
Line 300: northerlies are observed
Line 309, 312, 323: Section
Line 301, 330, 338, 343, 346,353, 355,377…… write between a “AND” b, not “TO”
Line 376: cloud configuration?
Line 427: and 58.6%
Line 442, 450: and high-level clouds
Line 442: has, not have
..........................................
..........................................

Please carefully check other sections…