The opinion of the referee who has provided a report on the revised version is that the paper is much improved. Whilst there is no report from the second referee, my own impression is that you have responded carefully to the comments of the two referees and to an additional set of discussion comments and therefore I am pleased to accept the paper subject to technical corrections specified below (though you should also check the paper more generally).

p2 l9: 'hub height' -- you haven't mentioned at this stage that this refers to a wind turbine (but you do later). Please clarify here.

p2 l11: 'braking' > 'breaking'

p2 l21: I suggest splitting sentence -- '... threefold. First we would like ...'

p6 l17: I assume that 'opposed swell waves' means that the phase speed is opposite to the wind direction -- but you never explicitly say this. Please confirm.

p8 l31: 'meteorologic' > 'meteorological'

p8 l34: 'A summary ... Table 1.' -- the commas in this sentence aren't really needed.

p11 l12: 'Clasius' > 'Clausius'

p11 l16: 'Tab.' > 'Table'

p12 l7: 'orientation of the propagation of the waves relative to the wind direction'?

p21 l21: 'traveling in the direction opposite to the wind direction'?

p13 l4: 'implicated' > 'implied'

Note also the minor technical comment made by the referee.