|Thank you for addressing my numerous comments and suggestions. The manuscript has substantially improved, thanks to clarifications and corrections by the authors. I recommend that the paper be accepted, but I provide a (small) list of final corrections to make. Thank you!|
1- p.6, line 19: I think the reference for Hutter et al. (2019) should be Hutter and Losch (2019) instead:
Hutter, N. and Losch, M.: Feature-based comparison of sea-ice deformation in lead-resolving sea-ice simulations, The Cryosphere Discuss., https://doi.org/10.5194/tc-2019-88, in review, 2019.
2- p.6, line 20: "They report inconsistent temporal scaling with a reasonably good temporal scaling"??? and later: "and no temporal scaling in the region covered by the EGPS data they compare to." There is a temporal scaling, however the scaling exponent is smaller than in observations. I would correct this sentence to:
"They also report a reasonably good temporal scaling, however the scaling exponents found for the model simulation in the same region covered by the EGPS data are smaller than in observations."
3- p.6, line 24: "but as this paper is still under review further detailing of their results is premature." The results shown in Hutter and Losch (2019) (reference above) are pretty conclusive. Please remove and add instead: "Hutter and Losch (2019) present further results confirming the ability of viscous-plastic sea-ice models run at very high resolution to reproduce the observed spatial and temporal scaling and multi-fractal behaviour of the ice."
4- p.7, line 14: "atmosphere–ocean interaction" --> "atmosphere–ocean interactions"
5- p.9, line 23: "The provided fields surface height fields" --> "The provided surface height fields"
6- p. 10, line 2: "The final ocean currents forcing" --> "The final ocean current forcing"
7- The methodology for the scaling analysis is much clearer! Thank you. However, to avoid confusion, I would change "polygon" to "triangle" everywhere in this section since you only are considering triplets of points, i.e. triangles.
8- p. 13, line 6: "A is the encompassed area of the polygon equal to L^2." --> "A is the encompassed area of the polygon approximately equal to L2." Not all triangle areas will be exactly equal to L^2 if L is a mean for all triangles.
9- p.14, line 26: "This effect is even more important..." This was already mentioned above at line 23 in the sentence starting with "In the time domain,..." Please remove one or the other.
10- p.15, line 4: "total, shear and absolute deformation rates" --> "total, shear and absolute divergence deformation rates"
11- p.15, line 6: "all simulated or observed deformation
rates for the period of 7 days" --> "all simulated or observed 3-day deformation rates for a period of 7 days"
12- p.15, line 23: "However, the first, second moments" --> "However, the first and second moments"
13- p.16, line 3: The reference to Bouchat and Tremblay (2017) should be inserted after point (2) instead of after point (3) in this sentence.
14- p.20, line 20: "We note that using a Lagrangian mesh then helps preserving such features, once formed, but plays no role in their formation." I still think it does matter in their formation as well. It is easier to resolve discontinuities with a Lagrangian mesh compared to an Eulerian one, and therefore it will be easier for those features to appear with a Lagrangian mesh. Please remove this sentence.
15- p.21, line 26: "that is about to be submitted." --> "in preparation."
16- Figure 1: Why do you have to mask the model field? If what you are plotting are the triangles that correspond to the ones in RGPS, then you should show all of them even if they cover different regions since they are entering your analysis.