Dear authors,

thank you very much for your detailed author responses to the reviewers comments - this is a very nice example of a constructive and detailed scientific discussion within the review process. I am looking forward to your revised manuscript !

Please note that the further process for publication in TC depends on the editor’s evaluation of the revised manuscript and will involve a second review round.

Thank you very much again for sending your work to The Cryosphere,
kind regards,

Christian Hauck
Editor

Dear authors,

the reviewers now provided a re-review, and both very much appreciate your revisions and have now only some technical (rev 1) and minor (rev 2) comments. In addition to the more technical nature of the comments of Reviewer 1, Reviewer 2 has still some reservations regarding your justification of the interpretation of the chaotic reflections in section 4.5 of the manuscript, which you should address accordingly. The reviewer also provided some suggestions how to strengthen your argumentation.
As both reviewers emphasized the high quality of your manuscript, I see no serious obstacles to publication after you have addressed this second round of comments of both reviewer's.

Looking forward to your revised manuscript,
with my best wishes for 2021,

Christian Hauck
Editor

Dear authors,

thank you very much for your clear author comments and your revised manuscript. I am happy to tell you that the manuscript can now be accepted for publication in The Cryosphere.

While re-reading your manuscript I found some small typographic errors (see list below), which you should correct before uploading your final version.

Thank you very much again for having submitted your research to TC.
Kind regards,

Christian Hauck
Editor

-----------------
Editor comments:

page 4 line 17: a bracket is missing

caption Figure 1: "...The black rectangle marks the subregions of (b) and (c)..." --> shouldn't this be (c) and (d) ?

page 12, line 25: "The amplitudes are high and a show little signal loss with increasing depth" --> delete "a" before "show"

page 13, line 23: "This causes the source wavelet of the borehole charges is longer as with detonating cord charges" --> should this be: "This causes the source wavelet of the borehole charges to be longer as with detonating cord charges" ?

page 16, line 30: delete the comma

page 20, line 16: "than" instead of "then"

page 20, line 19: " and as the..."

page 20, line 25: " with semiparallel reflections" (delete comma)

page 20, line 26 and line 29: again, delete the commas between "semiparallel reflections"

page 21, line 8: "would be a subglacial conduit" (insert "a")

page 21, line 13: "arrives before" instead "arrive before"

page 22, line 17: "their" instead of "its" ?

page 23, line 13-15: "Extrapolating the outer boundaries of this sedimentary sequence towards the grounding line, connect it to the subglacial drainage channel at the grounding line which is probably the source of the sedimentary sequence." --> grammar right ? Consider rephrasing.