Dear Andreas Wernecke,

thank you for your comprehensive response to the reviews. I now ask you to prepare the revision of your manuscript based on that response. It will be send out for a second round of reviews.

Regards,
Olaf Eisen

Dear authors,

we now received another two additional reviews, evaluating your revised version of the manuscript. In general, both are constructively positive. However, both reports are also resonant of previous raised criticism, indicating that you did not sufficiently address initially requested changes. Several of these are pivotal for a correct understanding and framing of the topics you address (for instance, one example is the usage of „projections“).
Before considering your manuscript for publication in The Cryosphere, I have to asks you once again to consider all points raised by reviewer 3 and 4. As these concern mostly the way the findings are described and phrased and do not tackle the core methodology of your approach, I consider them minor revisions, the implementation of which should not pose any difficulties. Nevertheless, please consider all of them thoroughly and provide a response describing in which way you did take them into account. Only with adequate consideration your mansucript will become acceptable for publication.

Regards,
Olaf

Dear Andreas and coauthors,

thanks you for the second revision of your manuscript. After four reviews I find that your manuscript improved considerably and addressed the reviewers' comments adequately. I am therefore happy to accept it for publication in TC. Before uploading the final version I ask you to check for compliance with the editorial/typesetting guidelines of TC. For instance from line 4 on in the supplement, make sure that your units are correctly set in text mode (e.g. also p15l17), not math mode, use abbreviation a or y or yr for year, set dh/dt in math mode (also at other places, e.g. p17l4: x,y), use km^2 or 10 km x 10 km for areas.

In the manuscript itself, please specify "X" in caption of Figure 2. It is not set in math mode and a bit unclear what it means.

eqn. (10): VAR is a variance operator? Please specify in the text.
P12l13: MAX is unusual (capital), usually \max is used.

Several issues will be corrected during the following copy editing phase by the editorial staff, e.g. punctuation marks in equations, hyphenation and minus signs, and alike. The more is correctly set beforehand, the less work it will make during copy editing for the staff and you. As your manuscript is math-heavy, I ask you to pay particular caution to the setting of all mathematical variables in the proof version.

Thank you for submitting to TC!

Best Regards,
Olaf

Co-Editor in Chief The Cryosphere