To the Authors,

Thanks for your reply to the reviewers' comments. Your response (and the time that has elapsed since the initial submission!) implies that a significant amount of additional work has gone into addressing in depth the topics that they raised. I would definitely encourage you to submit the revised manuscript you describe to The Cryosphere so that we can see it in detail.

Given that there have been, in your own words, "substantial revisions" to the original work, including several new simulations covering different model configurations and forcings, I think it would be appropriate for you to submit the new paper in two versions, both with and without track changes, and for the referees to have a chance to comment on what has been done.

Although your response addresses the great majority of the reviewers' comments well, I cannot see replies to the last 5 comments on individual passages made by reviewer 2 (starting at "Page 9, line 19, specify the extent of the ice that is considered for each type of ‘nudge’."). Could you address these last few points when you submit the revised version, please.

I look forward to seeing your revised manuscript

Robin Smith (Editor, ISMIP6 Special Issue)

Thanks for the considerable work you've done in revising the manuscript. There are a number of minor corrections suggested by the referee, and a request to at least condense your findings on using power law rather than coulomb sliding in the Conclusions. If you can add this and fix the corrections they raise, I will be happy to accept this for publication.