Metro System Inundation in Zhengzhou, Henan Province, China

The author(s) need to describe more detailed why this research is important in the viewpoint of globalization

Thank the reviewer for these valuable comments.

Due to the frequent occurrence of extreme storm weather in the world in recent years, different countries have made great efforts to keep the safety of underground space. However, there were few studies on this topic in the literature. It is necessary to emphasize the importance of this work. Please check the context from line 49 to 56 and 321 to 332 in the revised manuscript.

The author(s) need to revise based on 3 to 5 highlights in discussion part.

The author appreciates the reviewer’s comments.

In this report, after summarizing this event, we discussed and highlighted some terms as follows.

1. Discuss the importance of relevant contents of this study from the perspective of passenger flow.

2. Based on the analysis of the subjective causes of this incident, it is hoped that researchers will pay more attention to the safety of underground space.

3. It is required to show the role of this study in the world's underground space safety and predicts the development direction of the research on this topic in the future.

Please refer to lines 263-327 of the revised manuscript.

So what? Where and how can we apply based on this research results? The author(s) need to explain the applicability of this research.

The author thanks the reviewers for their comments and suggestions.

In the "conclusions" section, we add a description of the practical significance and application of this study, which will help readers to better understand how the preliminary investigation of this manuscript was provided.

See lines 425-430 in the revised manuscript.

Need to adjust the size of ezch photo and make blind of someone's face for all photo.

The authors appreciate the reviewer’s comment.

We resized all the figures and covered people's faces in all the pictures.

Figure 3. Need to change as followings：

Nation's map ---> Specific area's map ---> Target area's map

The authors thank the reviewer for this comment.

We changed Fig. 3 to make it more logical. The pictures are arranged in order from country to region to the place where the incident occurred. Please refer to the revised Fig. 3.

Effective numbers

The author(s) need to use at least 3 or more effective numbers. And also same effective numbers in a table or in a research article.

Ex.) 624.1 ---> 624

The authors thank the reviewer’s comments and suggestions.

The number of significant figures in the table and in the context has been adjusted to keep consistent. Please refer to the revised manuscript in Table 1.

The structure of the paper is strange and unreasonable. In 2. Materials and Methods part, the content is the accident process and rescue operation, in 3. Results and Discussions part, the content is potential causes of subway flooding accident and countermeasures, so the content is not consistent with the theme of each part.

The authors thank you for the comment.

In this report, we would like to describe the process of this accident and the related suggestions and recommendations in the future. We are sorry that the confusing sub-title of each part. In the revised text, we revised the corresponding subtitle of each section.

A map of railways in Henan and subways in Zheng Zhou should be added for better understanding;

Thank you for your constructive suggestions.

Line 207-215 should be deleted, the reason of the rainfall is should not belong to this article.

Thank you for your constructive recommendation.

The purpose of this study is to report the subway waterlogging event in Zhengzhou, conduct a preliminary investigation, and provide suggestions. The cause of extreme precipitation does not belong to the cause of waterlogging in the subway, so this part is deleted as non-important content in 3.2 Briefly mentioned. See lines 244-270 in the revised manuscript.

The analyses of potential causes of subway flooding accident and countermeasures is not enough and not targeted, and the countermeasures should be responded to potential causes.

The author thanks the reviewer’s comments and suggestions.

To understand the potential causes of the subway flooding accident more clearly, we did more analysis on the construction and design of infrastructure and discuss the weather, terrain, and human factors in this event.

Please refer to lines 226-260 and 263-285 of the revised version.

what is line 285-289? Deleted.

Thank you. We deleted these paragraphs to make the whole manuscript more logical.

While an interesting and well-presented report, the findings and conclusions need to be supported by a more in depth investigation.

We thank the reviewer for the positive comments and valuable suggestions on our research work.

We add more text in the introduction part to enrich the literature review. Moreover, we present a methodology used to deal with disaster risk management.

The report would benefit by:

Expanding the literature review

Thanks for this good suggestion. We have enriched the literature review section.

Please check the text in line 48-61 in the updated version.

Developing a methodology that targets disaster risk management techniques generally, and then specifically for circumstances similar to the case study presented here

Testing the findings through application of the modelling, even in a hypothetical context

How do other cities and regions prepare for and manage the risks for such disasters?

Thanks. In the revised manuscript, we add a methodology to do a risk assessment and management related to flooding. Please check the section of “4.3 suggested methodology” in line 397-422.

For other cities, it is suggested to apply remote sensing and Geographic Information System (GIS) technologies to monitor and assess the risk level based on the collected data. What’s more, it is suggested to consider the extreme weather condition during the design process of infrastructures. 

A rich body of academic literature exists that can be drawn on to assist the authors develop a suitable methodology to test their concerns and hypotheses

Yes. The authors totally agree with the reviewer. We have enriched the introduction section to present a more comprehensive literature review. Please check the added text in line 48-61 in the revised manuscript.