Evaluating the Hyperspectral Sensitivity of the Differenced Normalized Burn Ratio for Assessing Fire Severity
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I find the manuscript very well developed and interesting. It is very innovative mainly because of the hyperspectral data. I have only a minor comment concerning the discussion of the results.
- There is not much on why this spectral region used to apply the dNBR is better, what are the causal factors for this.
- The uncertainty as the author say is also a little bit big. I would like to see also something about it, about the why in the discussion.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Thank you for your comments and suggestions. Please see the attachement for our responses.
Best,
Max and Sander
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
This is a well-written paper on a properly conducted analysis with good results. The work is novel, but not highly significant, since optimal spectral bands for dNBR have been assessed in the past. However, it does add to what is known regarding the spectral characteristics of a post-burn site using a very interesting data set.
The use of GeoCBI, as opposed to CBI, is commended, as CBI has marginal use for comparison to a remote sensing signal. The only suggestion I have is to clarify the GeoCBI metrics. In the way it is presented (sec 2.3) there is an expectation that sites are tagged with a 0, 1, 2, or 3 (quantized metrics), whereas the metric is continuous scaling the 0-3 scale due to the method of data collection - the multiple observations that are combined. It would help the reader to not have to go to the GeoCBI reference to have a bit of that explained.
One other note: I do not have expertise in statistical assessment, so the approach to defining spectral optimality and performance should be evaluated by another reviewer.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you for your comments and suggestions. Please see our response in the attachement.
Best,
Max and Sander
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
