Dear Authors,

Both reviewers find the manuscript substantially improved, but suggest several further modifications before it can be considered for publication. In particular, Referee 1 requests that you clarify the issue of measurement resolution. I invite you to carefully revise the paper following their suggestions.

Best regards,
Aurelien Podglajen

Dear Authors,

I am overall convinced by the changes made to the manuscript in response to the reviews. However, related to the comment by referee 2, the explanation of the averaging (sect 2.3) could be further clarified. I see two possible ways to understand the current description:

- the shear and Brunt Vaisala frequency are computed at 10 m resolution (which implies a square root), and then those estimates are averaged over 200 m (20 points) and squared. I think this is what is done in light of the following paragraphs, in which case please state it unambiguously after Eq. 1.

or – the squared shear and BVF are computed and averaged over 200m, which would be strictly equivalent to subsampling at 200 m.

After this point has been clarified, I expect that your paper will be suitable for publication in ACP.

Sincerely,
Aurelien Podglajen

Dear Authors,

I am now pleased to accept the paper for publication. Congratulations!

Best regards,
Aurelien Podglajen