In addition to addressing the reviewer comments in your revised manuscript, I have one important comment and a few minor comments below:

Note that the journal policy on supplemental material has recently been updated (see here https://www.the-cryosphere.net/for_authors/manuscript_preparation.html). In particular, the policy states "Normal size figures, tables, as well as technical or theoretical developments that do not need to be included in the main text should be included as appendices". Please move the supplemental material to an appendix.

Line 204 –wind-based estimates have a range; I think most are more like 2% of the wind speed, and the direction is often variable. You might also want to explain why this is relevant here. I think NSIDC relies on winds only in summer, and the turning angle they use is 20 degrees.

Line 227-229 – Can you clarify if this bias actually exists? It is true that the grid will produce distortion. But, the NSIDC drift vectors are provided as actual u and v velocities. I thought these are computed from the actual physical positions, not from the EASE-grid grid positions. If it is the former, then the projection is not relevant, if the latter, then I agree, there is some distortion (in which case no change is needed)

Figure 7 caption – first sentence is confusing. Perhaps “Difference between collar drift and NSIDC drift for the u (x-axis) and v (y-axis) components”?

S1 third last sentence – do you mean “researcher discretion”?