The present manuscript explores the interaction between haze particles and activated cloud droplets, and its effect on droplet size distribution of steady-state conditions obtained from the Pi convection chamber. The analyses are carried out by using large-eddy simulations (LES) of the Pi-chamber, with Eulerian bin microphysics that resolve the continuous process of haze growth and activation/deactivation. The main parameter of discussion is the aerosol injection rate, which regulates the amount of haze and cloud droplets in the chamber driving the system to two distinct regimes reported in a previous paper: fast and slow microphysics. It is argued that in the case of slow microphysics, corresponding to low aerosols injection rates, the transition form cloud droplets to haze is negligible, whereas a fast microphysical regime can lead to two novel regimes reported here: the cloud oscillation and cloud collapse. Oscillations are claimed to occur due to successive activation and deactivation events, whereas cloud collapse occurs when the condensation onto the particles surface is extremely efficient in reducing the saturation rate to equilibrium. The LES experiments done here clearly illustrate the importance of resolving the continuous growth of haze and its activation. Not only does it present a more accurate description of droplet formation, but it reveals new dynamical regimes.

This paper is well motivated, written and the results illustrate novel delicate features of cloud droplet activation through LES modelling. I recommend publishing this work subject to minor modifications and after the clarification of the comments below.

General questions

1. It is mentioned on several occasions that the convection chamber is a turbulent domain. What is the role of turbulence in provoking oscillations? How is turbulence included in the box model? What fields does it affect?
2. The origin of cloud oscillations needs to be better explained. The authors clearly explain how polluted conditions, i.e. fast microphysics regime, lead to more delicate interplay between haze and droplets. This makes as the interplay between the curvature and solute effects becomes more delicate. In the abstract, it is mentioned that “cloud oscillation arises from complex interactions between haze and cloud droplets in a turbulent cloud”, however the read-outs of figure 4 (last row) show that oscillations occur at what seems the activated radius-domain. Can the authors clarify this? It would be helpful on this regard to indicate more clearly (quantitatively) when the authors consider particles to be haze, perhaps by indicating the critical Köhler radius. Do the authors observe oscillations between haze and activated droplets? The oscillations in figures 1 and 4 seem to only be occurring at radii larger that the critical radius.

Specific questions

1. Line 132-133: “Solute and curvature effects are not considered for droplet growth by condensation”. Does that mean that once the aerosols activates into a droplet, its growth is entirely proportional to the available supersaturation?
2. Line 141: “evaporation can still occur due to turbulent supersaturation fluctuations”. What is the source/origin of these fluctuations? How are they controlled? Do they play a role in broadening the droplet size spectra?
3. Line 145: Is the removal by sedimentation uniquely due to gravity or also due to vertically oscillation motion within the chamber? Hence, does it affect all particles equally or it affects more the larger ones?
4. Does the sedimentation rate depend on the injection rate?
5. Line 204: How is the turbulent mixing time defined in the context of the Pi-chamber?
6. (5) represents particle removal, and it depends on the radius of the class of particles in question. Injection of aerosols also affects the number of particles, how is this accounted for in the full equation?
7. The oscillations seem to be driven by aerosol injection rates and loss through sedimentation. If the system reaches a steady-state, I understand that injection and loss are compensated and, therefore, there is no net flux of particles. What, then, provokes oscillations, for example, in Figure 4 or 11?