The Catastrophe of the Niedów Dam—The Causes of the Dam’s Breach, Its Development, and Consequences

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

I have read your manuscript with great interest and I find it a very valuable and clearly presented work that also was an exciting read. I think the manuscript is very well set up structurally and built on a very rich data set and provides very vital information about dam failures. The manuscript scientific aspects is fine to me, and it is easy to follow. I have find only few minor issues mostly related to the data presentation style and clarity that hopefully will elevate the impact of the work. I have provided an annotated PDF file where you can follow my minor comments. I think after minor revision the manuscript can be accepted.

 

Kind regards,

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you very much for your appreciation of our work and valuable comments to improve the readability and potential impact of the paper. So, we went carefully through all your comments and brought amendments to the manuscript, highlighted by the change tracking option. Only  in two cases we left the text unchanged:

1) Page 3, line 85, concerning ‘wide floodplains’. This term is commonly used in hydrology and geomorphology, and it is difficult to numerically define from what latitude a valley is wide. We suggest leaving this term unchanged. 

2) Page 3, line 93, the reference to Figure 1., as the suggested placement lies in the paper goal statement, followed by the case study description, where the reference to Figure 1 is located at the beginning.

With kind regards,

Authors

Reviewer 2 Report

Specific comments:

1. The basic equations of the software MIKE21 should be given and the symbols in these equations should be explained.
2. See annotated manuscript for "editorial" errors! 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you for your careful reading of the manuscript and for indicating several faults and oversights as well as for a suggestion. The basic MIKE21 equations with notations are provided. Editorial amendments are brought into the manuscript along with corrected  figures for better readability. Thank you very much again.

Authors

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

See annotated manuscript for some "editorial" errors! 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.