Dear Authors,

thank you for your responses to the referee comments. Overall the paper has received a positive evaluation although a number of suggestions have been made that the structure & content of this paper needs improvement. Your responses indicate that this will be dealt with. One referee has request to re-check the revised version again and I will follow his/her request. Please upload a revised version (with changes tracked) and we will proceed with review.

Kind regards, Reinhard Drews

Dear Authors,
thanks you for answering to the reviewer's concerns and for providing a revised version. As requested by the reviewers, I will send this paper out to re-review. Kind regards, Reinhard Drews

Dear Authors,
the re-review of your revisions is positive and mentions a number of smaller points that should be considered at this point. Please respond to the remarks of the reviewer. I will then check the next version of the paper.

Kind regards, Reinhard Drews

Dear Authors,

Thank you for the last round of revisions. Throughout the review process both reviewers have positively evaluated this work and the revisions have further strengthened the paper. I agree with the reviewers that this is a great paper for The Cryosphere. I believe that it treats and important topic and will help our community in including the ever increasing radar data archive into ice-flow models. Below I have another round of minor comments which you may want to consider prior to typesetting. Congratulations for a very meaningful piece of work.

Kind regards,

Reinhard Drews

Minor comments:

P1 #l2: The IRH geometry is also imprinted by basal melting.

P2 #l38: If I remember well Martin et al., 2009 is exclusively related to Antarctica. I suggest adding “…of the Greenlandic and Antarctic ice sheets”

P3 Eq (1): Define \tau_b also in text.

P3 L79/L95 Consider rephrasing: I don’t agree that ice streams and ice shelves do not have a preferred crystal orientation fabric orientation. From what I have heard, e.g., from studies on the onset of NEGIS the contrary seems to be the case. Also measurements , e.g., on Whillans Ice Stream (Jordan et al., https://doi.org/10.1017/aog.2020.6) show ice anisotropy. I am not asking you to change anything on the modelling side, but the simplifications applied (ice anisotropy is “only” a function of vertical shearing) should be treated with more caution and can be explained in a larger context.

P5 L113: “figure 1”  “Figure 1”

P5 L150: Is it really noise or climate-variability on timescales < 10kyr?

Consider adding coordinates to Figs 2 and 3.

Section 2.4 Consider adding a sentence or two for what would be required if other users want to apply a different host model. How does the coupling look like in practice? Moreover: Can this approach also accommodate inclusion of isochronal surface with unknown age?

Section 3.3: The comparison with the Eulerian age trace is great, however, when reading through the paper I realized that no details were provided on the implementation of the Eulerian tracer. Specifics can be important here and I suggest to provide some numerical context, possibly by referencing the specific discretization scheme applied (cf. Greve et al., 2002, https://doi.org/10.3189/172756402781817112).

Consider acknowledging the input of the reviewers in the acknowledgements.

I appreciate your supplements with the python function, however, when I tried using it I got the following error:
| => python read_data.py
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "read_data.py", line 9, in
ens = pickle.load(open('lhs_ensemble.pickle','rb'))
ModuleNotFoundError: No module named 'yelmo_utils'