|Review for “Low level stratiform clouds and dynamical features observed within the Southern West African Monsoon” by Cheikh Dione et al.|
The authors have engaged very well with the reviewers’ comments and the manuscript is now in a state that is nearly ready for publication. Two figures should still be adjusted to improve legibility, but these are minor (technical) corrections.
Considering this figure in the context of the manuscript, the barbs are not essential to this figure. It appears that wind direction is relevant for the identification of the NLLJ, as described on page 9 lines 17-18, but this is not referred to again when discussing figure 4. The barbs therefore clutter the figure while their information is summarized by the black vertical line for NLLJ onset.
The panels also contain an unnecessary dashed line at zero height, to separate the coloured figure from the line plot below. I propose the following improvements:
1. Remove the wind barbs. If the authors believe this is essential information for the paper (which is possible, given the barbs inform the NLLJ detection), then they can be included as a separate, supplementary figure. To reiterate, the authors do not mention wind direction in their discussion of Figure 4, so it does not appear essential for this figure.
2. Slightly detach the coloured figure from the line plot below, so that the need for the dashed line is removed. It will allow the y-axis label (Height) to be centered on the coloured figure and allow a separate y-axis (FLF?) for the line graph below.
This figure does not require “the mean color of the IR cloud sky camera image” to be included. It is clear from Figure 9 how LLC onset and break are determined from the IR imagery, so the key point of Figure 10 is to show how LLC onset and break vary with NLLJ onset and break. The colours distract from this information.
Also, the black stars are difficult to discern, partly because of the colours, but also because markers are used for the four lines. Please remove the markers (currently squares) for those lines, so that the black starts stand out as the only markers of interest.
Page 4, line 1-2: Please include the Dee et al. (2011) reference for ERA-Interim:
Dee, D.P., Uppala, S.M., Simmons, A.J., Berrisford, P., Poli, P., Kobayashi, S., Andrae, U., Balmaseda, M.A., Balsamo, G., Bauer, D.P. and Bechtold, P., 2011. The ERA‐Interim reanalysis: Configuration and performance of the data assimilation system. Quarterly Journal of the royal meteorological society, 137(656), pp.553-597.
Page 8, line 1: “3th” Should this be “1.5 UHF wind profiler gates”?
Page 9, line 21: “satisfied for at least two hours” – this part of the NLLJ onset criterion is not reflected in Figure 4 and the discussion, e.g. page 11, line 3-4: “the wind vertical profile reaches the threshold of 5 m/s at 2100 UTC, which is the onset time of the NLLJ”. Should the onset time be 2300 UTC, or does the two-hour criterion only apply to wind direction and/or surface sensible heat flux?