Ensemble of Below-Cloud Scavenging Models for Assessing the Uncertainty Characteristics in Wet Raindrop Deposition Modeling
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In the manuscript authors test the multi-model ensemble for prediction of below-cloud scavenging. As a members of ensemble it has been chosen combinations of models describing the efficiency of aerosol capture by raindrops, the terminal velocity of raindrop deposition, and the size distribution of raindrops. By comparing the results of various combinations of models with experimental results authors were able to choos such a combination which gives the best results. As one can see, the subject of manuscript is quite important and its results are valuable, howebver before the publication a few corrections should be made:
- In general - because of a lot of symbols appearing, particularly in Sec. 2, it could be beneficial to add the symbol list instead of explaining the meaning of (almost) all the symbols throughout the manuscript.
- I am afraid that after eq (3) the terms of efficiences are switched: the term Eint (which arises to depend on d/D ratio) is in fact interception term and Eine (dependent on Stokes number) is inertial impaction term - quite the opposite then stated in line 137
- In the same line - the index in Ebr contains lowercase b while in eq. (3) and (4) we have EBr with capital letter B. It doesn't matter much, but I still recommend to unify it and tu review the manuscript carefully for similar typos.
BTW: strange typo in line 326: "models"
- "difference between particle and raindrop absolute temperatures 125 ??−?? = 5º" - this assumption appears at least two times in the manuscript but there is no explanation why such a difference was assumed for the computations. This explanation should be given.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Ensemble of below-cloud scavenging models for assessing the 2 uncertainty characteristics in wet raindrop deposition modeling
The ensemble of below-cloud scavenging 14 models has been formed using the selected experimental data, the identified set of raindrop-aerosol 15 capture models, raindrop terminal velocity parameterizations and descriptions of the raindrop size 16 distribution. Having obtained the FB, FAC5, etc. metric as a result of statistical analysis, the pre-17 pared pool of models has proved to adequately describe the experimental data
Overall, the article is written very well and according to the scope of journal. Article can be published in the journal after addressing following comments.
1. Please write the abstract with main objectives of the study.
2. Please write a solid policy implication at the end of abstract.
3. Please write research questions and main contributions of the study at the end of introduction section.
4. Why weather forecast is important? You may write some reasons. I can recommend to add the given statement or reason with given studies [1,2] at the end of first paragraph of introduction as “Weather forecast is obviously important as extreme weather damaged the crop production [1,2].”
[1] Extreme weather events risk to crop-production and the adaptation of innovative management strategies to mitigate the risk: A retrospective survey of rural Punjab, Pakistan
[2] Inferring Long-Run Climate Damages from Weather Fluctuations: A Diferentiable Approach.
5. Results and discussion are fine. Some findings are lack of justifications. I recommend to compare the results with previous studies.
Best of luck with publication.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors have addressed all the previous comments, and now the article is ready to publish.
