Dear Authors,

Thank you for your responses to the reviewer comments. Based on the referee reports and your responses, I would like to invite you to submit a revised version of your manuscript. The revised manuscript will be evaluated by myself prior to being considered for publication in TC.

Best regards,
Emily Collier

Dear Authors,

Thank you for your efforts and thoughtful revisions in response to reviewer comments. I am pleased to accept your interesting manuscript for publication in TC subject to addressing a few, largely technical last points:

1. Reviewer 1 asked "Does the choice of a different threshold affect when foehn is detected, and how did you settle on the specific directions you use?" I think this is a valid point and would be happy to see a more detailed answer to this question as well as a clearer justification for the specific ranges added to the methods section.

2. L118: Is the first part of this sentence correct? Measurements are not my speciality but S_in and S_out are usually measured (here presumably with the 4-component radiometer) while albedo is calculated.

3. L153: Please provide an indication of the atmospheric depth covered by the first 15 model levels in AMPS.

4. L302: I suggest adding "(not shown)" since this specific result is not visible to the reader.

5. Figure 10: I like the idea to use vectors but have trouble interpreting them. What does the length correspond to, if the origin indicates 10*windspeed? Can you please provide a reference vector as well as some indication in the caption which directions are up/down glacier for ease of reading?

Thank you and best regards,
Emily Collier

Dear Authors,

Thank you for your replies and final clarifications. I am pleased to accept the manuscript in this form for publication in TC. Congratulations on the nice work!

Best regards,
Emily Collier