Dear Kalliopi,

thank you for providing a revised version of your manuscript. The two Referees agree to the publication of the work subject to minor/technical corrections.

I have also read the manuscript and would like to provide some guidance regarding these corrections. Please find my suggestions below.

With best regards,
Matthias

- Please introduce all used parameters and describe their meaning. For instance, the parameters in Eq. (1) are not introduced. Also, it is not clear where the temperature profiles used to obtain cirrus top temperatures come from. Please also define what mid temperature is.
- Please introduce acronyms upon first usage and stick to them afterwards. For instance, LR is used in line 55 without previous introduction.
- I'd suggest to exclude the measurements in India from the paper. Ten data points are simply insufficient to draw any conclusions. You could still mention the findings, though.
- You need to clarify what is meant with case and occurrence. Is a case one 1-h interval or does it refer to one cloud? If it's the former, you need to provide some discussion regarding the connection between 1-h intervals and whole clouds so that the reader knows how to interpret the statistical findings. When you use occurrence, please clarify the reference, i.e. number of all clouds, cases, observation hours...?
- There is an abundance of redundant text. I'd suggest to check with the senior authors for parts that can be omitted or shortened. Please also check the grammar while screening the text.
- the description of the multiple-scattering correction is not clear. You mention the measured single-scattering extinction profile. Isn't the measured profile the one affected by multiple scattering?
- Please provide proper captions to all figures. The captions should enable the reader to understand the content of the figures. All shown properties should be mentioned. Please also check that all axis titles are okay and refer to proper parameters. For instance, please replace backscatter with backscatter coefficient in Figure 3c. Also, make sure that the caption agrees with the figures.
- I don't think Figure 4 is needed. You can add the number of day and night cases to any of the plots that show monthly statistics.
- Figure 7 an related text could be omitted.
- Please don't show the same results in a figure and a table. Either stick with Figure 9 or Table 5.
- The entire discussion about the effect of aerosols in Section 4.3 is somewhat dubious if there is no evidence presented that those aerosols are at cirrus level. I'd suggest to be more cautious with this discussion. The statistics to draw any conclusions for the Indian site are simply not good enough as outlined before.