Thanks very much for your thorough responses to both reviews. The revisions you have outlined extend the analysis in some important ways, notably through focus on the Antarctic Peninsula. You have also clarified the or addressed all the areas of potential confusion raised by both reviewers.

Please proceed with submission of the revised manuscript. Thanks very much for your contribution to The Cryosphere.

Thank-you for addressing all the review comments in the revised manuscript. This is a novel application of SMOS measurements. All concerns have now been addressed and the paper reads very clearly. I have identified a number of editorial corrections - please implement these when submitting the final manuscript.
Thanks very much for your contribution to The Cryosphere.

Line 24: change to “…and applied to the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets.”
Line 26: change to “In the case of radiometer measurements, studies have…”
Line 51: change to “…missing values…”
Line 72: change to “indicates”
Line 72: change to “angles”
Line 87: change “present” to “presence”
Line 106: not clear what is meant by “remanence”?
Line 109: change to “spatial variations”
Line 123: change “submitted” to “subjected”
Line 123: do you mean “but high interannual variability…”?
Line 125: change “extend” to “extent”
Line 126: change to “minima and maxima”
Line 132: change to “provides additional information…”
Line 155: change “Its has” to “It has”
Line 182: change to “This is the rationale…”
Line 220: change “first centimeters” to “top centimeters”
Line 225: change to “surface of the snowpack”