Estimation of Snow Depth in the Hindu Kush Himalayas of Afghanistan during Peak Winter and Early Melt Season
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This can potentially be an excellent paper written on a very hot but difficult science topic, that is, the estimation of deep high mountain snow from microwave remote sensing measurements.
I rated the paper as "high" for the following reasons:
The authors use an interesting approach to estimate snow depth from synthetic aperture radar (SAR) measurements that can provide additional information to estimate deep snow more accurately than traditional radar or passive microwave measurements (which have major flaws). Also, I am convinced by reading the paper that the authors have excellent understanding and perspective on the snow retrieval.
In addition, the authors describe the retrieval process in sufficient detail that a microwave scientist can understand. I had a hard time understanding the details initially due to the poor English used, but ultimately came to the conclusion that the description of the technique is very good, PROVIDED that the authors make a major effort in improving readability. This is the major concern that I have.
For example, whenever a statement is made, such as "there are several studies on this subject", the authors should provide a reference. Even in fiction, one has to provide an explanation for a general statement. Please, add references and improve the English. Other than that, this is an excellent paper.
More illustration of the readability:
"Based on World Bank report" (line 47), this is weak, please, provide as reference (which report?).
Avoid using "significant" in a general sense to indicate "substantial". Significance in science has a statistical meaning.
Same for the statements made in Line 67. No reference is provided, also be specific for "density", it should be "snow density", etc, etc.
Equations have dots (....), please remove them.
Author Response
The response to the reviewer's comments are attached
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
Your manuscript is a sound presentation of new advance methodology for the estimation of snow depth. Overall, your manuscript is well composed, however some minor English editing is required. The conclusion section needs significant improvement as it does not summarise the findings of your work comprehensively and does not provide any next steps/future research.
Please find my comments in the attached file.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
The response to the reviewer comments are attached
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Please see the attachment.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
The response to the reviewer's comments is attached.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
