We received two valuable reviews for this manuscript, of which one raises more fundamental issues. Based on the author responses in the discussion phase I am confident that the authors will be able to clarify the problematic issues and will be able to perform additional simulations where needed. Both reviewers ask for additional details regarding the observational data. Furthermore, the questions regarding the model performance and its evaluation (point 3 by reviewer 2) are especially important.

Thanks to the authors for submitting a revised version of this interesting work. While both reviewers find the manuscript a valuable contribution, they also raise important points. Especially they confirm my own impression that the authors not fully addressed all of the review comments from the first round, or replied to them in the discussion without then modifying the text. In this round it is crucial that all the comments are fully addressed. These issues are relatively minor and should be straight-forward to address, but they are nevertheless very important to make the manuscript a as valuable contribution as possible. Please ensure that all the important information is given clearly, the reader should not have to have to search too much for this (see also comment by reviewer #1).