Dear authors

thanks to the referees for their extensive reports and to you, the authors, for detailed response. A nice example of a thorough discussion. It becomes clear the work has innovative aspects, is interesting but needs quite some work in focus, explaining and discussion. And clearly, the paper should be shortened. Removing the virtual experiments is a good suggestion that I strongly recommend. Also streamlining the paper, based on referees reports. Furthermore, the authors could consider adding an appendix or some supplement material for some of the not-directly-needed details.

I look forward to receive the revised version of the manuscript. As the revision is quite substantial and therefore the authors need some more time for the revision, please ask extension of the re-submission deadline.

Kind regards
Thom Bogaard

Dear authors

my compliments on this revision. I agree with both reviewers you did good job. The paper needs only some minor explanations, rephrasing and revisions. The reviewers listed them in their reviews.

I look forward receiving the revised paper in due time.

Regards
Thom

Dear authors

thanks for again a thorough response to the two detailed reviews. I am happy to say your paper is now accepted for publication. I found a two typo's and I give you one consideration on the wording of the hypothesis (see attached pdf). This can be changed when uploading the final text or when proof-reading.

I congratulate you with this paper and wish you all the best in your research

Kind regards
Thom Bogaard