Dear Festi and co-authors,

I have now had an in-depth look to your responses to the reviewers and your new version of your manuscript, with underlined changes. I have also sent your new version of the manuscript to one of the previous referees, but the latter declined the invitation. I am therefore left with having to take a final decision on your manuscript.

As I mentioned earlier on, my general impression was not too optimistic in view of the referees comments, since one of the reviewers suggested not to publish the paper, and the other asked for major revisions.

However, in view of your replies to the reviewers and of the revised version of the manuscript, I think you have again made big efforts to improve its content and messages. I also consider that you give a better argumentation on the added value of this manuscript compared to what has been previously published with the same set of data. I am therefore enclined to accept the paper for publication in The Cryosphere, provided that you go through my last set of comments and requests attached to this message. The major request is probably to drop section 5.5, which is to me (and the reviewers) clearly not convincing enough...For the rest, it is merely aiming at being a bit more cautious or addressing more cosmetic changes.

Thank you for your patience and willingness to improve your manuscript. I will leave to Antarctica on the 1st of April for more than 2 months, so, please provide a revised version as soon as possible in order not to cumulate further delays in the publication!..

Good luck,

Jean-Louis Tison

Dear Daniela and Co,

Thank you for your fast response and taking those last comments into account.
Reading your manuscript again, I found some left inconsistencies as listed here below. Would you please be kind enough to correct these in a new version of the manuscript?
Attention!...line numbers and changes are referring to your annotated version in your "author's response"!..

p. 6, line 30: Should be "Figure 3a" instead of "Figure 4"...to keep the sequence of the figures numbering as it is called in the text

p.6, line 32: should refer to 'Fig. 4" only

p.6, line 36: change to: "..August 2013 (Fig. 4b)"

p.6, line 39: should refer to : "..(Fig. 4 and 5).."

p.7, line 6: change to: "...inversions (empty squares in Fig. 2b)..."

p. 10, line 10: delete the second "also"

p. 10, line 13: change to: "witnessed"

p.10, line 16: change to "could" (d missing)

p.11, line 12: my first name is "Jean-Louis" :0) ..

Figure 3 becomes Figure 4 and vice versa

Caption of new Figure 3: should be "2008 to 2013" .. if we follow the text