The manuscript "Fluorescence lidar observations of wildfire smoke inside cirrus: A contribution to smoke-cirrus – interaction research" is very well written and presents a novel apprach to combine Flourescence and Multiwavelength Raman Lidar to better isolate vertically profiled smoke characteristics both in the free atmosphere as well as in cirrus clouds. The approach is quite empirical and intersting and should provide a uselfull tool in exploring a number of aerosol - cloud interctions and how smoke can mix and be modified in cloudy backround enironments. One issue is that it is not clear what kind of quantitative errors we are propogating into the Flouresence retreivals (both Flourescence Backscatter and Smoke  Microphysical). In particular, estimates of plausible errors  are not shown in Tables 1 or 2 whereas the aerosol parameter errors are estimated. 

The paper presents a methodology based on fluorescence lidar measurements, that allows to detect and to quantify the smoke content in upper troposphere and lower stratosphere (UTLS). The methodology is based on several assumptions which are not well validated. 

My major conern is about the methodology to retrieve the values of N_F S_F V_F (lines 193-199, and 217-219). For instance, the authors explain that they retrieve the N, S, V values from optical data 3β+2α. Then they introduce C_N, C_S C_V parameters (eq. 3), based on the previous retrieval of the β_F values. The state that these factors allow the estimation of N, S, V from fluorescence backscatter, although N, S, V values are already known from the optical data 3β+2α. This is a point of confusion.

Another issue is how they retrieve the N_F S_F V_F values. This is not at all clear in the manuscript. Do these values come from the comparison with the N S V ones from different cases studies?

These points need clarification, along with putting error bars in all parameters shown in the various profiles.

Some minor corrections have to be made, basedon the uploaded annotated manuscript. In many places the article "the" is missing. The English text should be revised,as in some places it is unclear.

PS. I propose to introduce in an appendix or supplement a flow chart showing each calculation step for every retreived parameter [eg. (3β+2α) --> N, S, V; β_F --> β^S₅₃₂ , etc]. This will facilitate the reader to follow the estimation of the different parameters.