Dear Dr. Dufour and colleagues

Thank you very much for your efforts to address the reviewer comments and prepare the revised version of the manuscript.

Still, there is one issue by reviewer 1 that I feel you did not address in your response and revised manuscript, but which could be quite important for the overall conclusions.

This is about your interpretation of results in section 4, page 6 starting with line 22 in manuscript version 4. The reviewer wrote:
"My interpretation of fig 7 is that it shows outward moisture flux at low levels with inward flux above. The low-level outward flux is smaller at the radiosonde stations than on average and is mostly due to moisture transport by the mean wind. By contrast, the inward flux at higher levels at the sonde stations is similar to that averaged along the boundary and, for both observations and reanalyses, is dominated by transient eddy fluxes - presumably a result of cyclones in the coastal region."

I am looking very much forward receiving your response to that comment or potentially a revised version of the manuscript.

Kind regards
Christian Beer