Based on the two reviewers' comments and suggestions, this manuscript needs a major revision before it can be considered for publication in The Cryosphere. The work provided by the authors are highly valuable for snow studies and will be very helpful for snow depth measurements. The authors should consider all comments and suggestions pointed out by the two reviewers.

The manuscript needs to be reviewed again by the reviewers.

The authors basically have done a satisfactory work to respond the second reviewers' comments and suggestions. Although the editor was unable to have a second round review by the first reviewer, the authors have indicated that they have responded carefully. Here the authors are asked to respond to the editor that besides the response in the reply letter, what did the authors exactly revise in terms of the reviewer #1's comments in the revised version of this manuscript. It will be very helpful to the editor if the authors will provide the precise text term by term for the reviewer #1's comments and suggestion in their revised manuscript. The authors also need to make serious considerations on the second reviewers' second round comments and suggestion, especially on spell and grammars as pointed out by the reviewer.