Airglow Derived Measurements of Q-Branch Transition Probabilities for Several Hydroxyl Meinel Bands
, Niklas Hofmann 3, Robert Edward Hibbins 1,2 and Anlaug Amanda Djupvik 4Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
It was interesting to read about your current and previous measurements using NOT. While the English is acceptable in some places the manuscript is a little clumsy. I suggest read the manuscript over again for phrasing. This effort is different from most OH rotational temperature work in using and analyzing the Q branch. With a few minor fixes this manuscript is suitable for publication. Below follow my specific comments,
Line 23 There appears to be an extra space between the sentences.
Line 29 This line is indented, but it does not appear to be a new paragraph.
Line 29 add a comma after 3.3eV
Line 30 Relaxation of the vibrationally excited OH molecule happens through radiative and collisional relaxation
Line 31 mid-infrared is out past 3 micron. NOT operates in the NIR and SWIR
Line 65-68 This is primarily at high rotational levels N>3
Line 87 You give the slit size in arcseconds, but it would be more interesting if it were in lengths at the mesopause
Line 88 high --> sufficient
Line 105 add comma before the "and"
Line 105 "and the results combined" -->"and the results were combined"
Line 113 "A dark current was subtracted," --> "The dark current was..."
Line 130 The fourth order polynomial seems to be overkill, and looking at the fit in Fig. 1 the background is very smooth. Also it may be appropriate to explain the origin of the background. Is it instrumental scattered light? Is it thermal background? Or is it airglow emission?
Line 140 "HITRAN database and found" --> "HITRAN database, and were found"
Line 156 Equation 2 It might be useful to add a dot for multiplication between N and A
Line 178 Figure 2 The words "subbranch" in the legend could use the hyphen
Line 188 "assuming a collisional Boltzmann distribution" Should this be an iso-thermal Bolzmann distribution?
Line 190 Equation 5 Similar to equation 2 that some form of spearation might help the readability
Line 196 "to be reliable Pendelton" --> "to be reliable by Pendelton"
Line 242 Table 1 I am curious why (9,7) Q1(2), and the (4,2) Q1(4) HITRAN coefficients are lower than yours when all the rest are greater. It may be helpful to talk about this.
Line 277 Figure 4 Remove the results from the caption
Line 305 Fitting the P-branch, which N' where used, and was it P1, P2, or both
Line 328 "probabilities will be lead" -- > "probabilities will lead"
Line 353 typo in the page number
Line 361 typo in the name Russell III
Line 389 should nordic optical telescope be capitalized?
Line 393 same as previous comment should nordic optical telescope be capitalized?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
I found the paper very well written and enjoyable to read. The results are important. Well done.
Author Response
We thank the reviewer for the positive review and the kind words.
Reviewer 3 Report
I don't understand the sentence "In a given vibrational-rotation level, the upper state population is the same for all branches." in lines 158-159. It does not seem to lead to the next sentence, where two different lower rotational levels are considered.
Line 162. The two numbers in "Q1(1)" should be defined. I cannot find whre the difference between the Q1-sub-branch and Q2-sub-branch is explained or defined.
Line 259. "the the" should be replaced by "the".
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
