Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article presents the results of a small Astroneu shower experiment supplemented with antennas to measure radio signals from EAS. This technology has been developed intensively for years with the hope that low-cost antennas would replace expensive and complicated ground-based detector systems. 

So far, the results have been sensational for some and unpromising for others. The Astroneu+RF results show a fairly obvious use of RF signals for determining the directions of EAS arrival, and in this aspect RF measurements are legitimate and valuable. The authors confirm the results obtained so far and show their sense for small shower arrays (with the obvious limitation of statistics by the always present RF noise).

Another aspect investigated in the paper under review is the use of radio measurements to determine the position of shower axes. The methods described in detail in the paper based on polarization measurements are both interesting and may inspire hope for the future, although they are currently only a small addition to standard methods. Nevertheless, the analysis of these possibilities and the results presented in the paper are worth noting.

The description of the current state of the Astroneu+RF apparatus is an additional strength of the paper.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you very much for your comments.

Reviewer 2 Report

Minor changes to text are required.

Suggestions and corrections are in the file attached.

* Can you explain how do you obtain the error of the shower axis parameters? Is it only statistical error or systematic uncertainties are considered?

* It is mentioned that a scaling factor was applied to the simulated signal but is not clear where this scaling factor comes from. Can you give further information about it?

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer

Thank you very much for your comments and suggestions.

We have included all the corrections and suggestion in the manuscript.

Please find  the answers to your questions inside the file we upload since we have included math formulas that cannot be displayed in this "edit box"

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper presents a performance analysis of a valuable cosmic ray extensive air shower detector array. It is generally well-written (except for some distracting English language issues mentioned below) and considers the basic issues needed to evaluate how well the array performs its intended function. Minor, but still distracting English grammar errors are, unfortunately distributed throughout the manuscript. Before it is published it should be edited carefully by a native English speaker.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you for your comments.

We have corrected the grammar and syntax errors.