Wave Buoy Measurements at Short Fetches in the Black Sea Nearshore: Mixed Sea and Energy Fluxes

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Review: Wave buoy ... by
Rybalko, Myslenkov, Badulin

I think this paper provides valuable data on and analysis of, wind wave interaction and should be published. I have made some edits/questions directly on the manuscript that the authors can deal with, without responding as to how they did so.

My only main comment is that more needs to be said for the reader to understand the Reanalysis data.
"Wind speed and direction are hourly data..." What does that mean?
    Wind speed and direction are measured hourly...
                             are computed as a function of time in hours ... ?
Please give a paragraph explaining what the CFSR is and what it does. Much of the paper is about comparing measurements to the reanalysis data, and it is not clear what that is. I think the paragraph from lines 170-181 is meant to tell us what the reanalysis data is. The "reanalysis data" is from the Wavewatch III model using wahtever is given by the NCEP CFSR v2.

Maybe have a paragraph that says - we compare two types of data: (i) measurements of wind from the Anapa station and waves from the buoy, and (ii) reanalysis data. The reanalysis data is computed ...

Another comment is - please rewrite the sentences that use words like "likely, sort of, rather", to be quantitative.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Correlation between wave and wind data is studied by means of comparing different methods versus buoy measurement. I think that the main drawback of this study is the extraction of compatible wind data. However, collecting different methods and using one year buoy measurements are valuable points. I can suggest this paper if the following comments are addressed properly in the revised manuscript.

 

1.      Line 50, wind data have been extrapolated based on a station 10 or 20Km far from the buoy location. Since adjacent mountains affect the wind pattern, is using such wind data for wave evaluation correct?  Of course not. And this will affect all the results. Am I true? Please add some clarification note about the assumptions.

2.      Line 314, which parameter do you mean from mean over spectrum. Direction? Please clarify and introduce all the parameters.

3.      Fig. 3, the reanalysis data is mentioned. Please prior to this, add some clarifications about the reanalysis data, the analysis procedure, income and outcomes. Why fig. 3b and d (both based on reanalysis) are not consistent in direction?

4.      Line 350 to 356, one reason for the differences is reported the existence of mixed seas and different wave systems. Can you present a total overview about the shape of wave spectra? I mean one peak or double peak or multi peak and their numbers. You can find some good references for deriving two or complex wave systems in the following references [1-3]. I suggest referring to these studies and discuss about their outcomes which are based on buoy measurements too. In addition, it is better to define the base of swell waves, if presents in the area. Another question is that if your approach is applicable to complex seas with different wave systems? If waves are independent of local winds, deriving such correlations between wind and wave is not true.

5[1] Development of a bi-modal directional wave spectrum, R Panahi, M Shafieefar, Ocean Engineering 105, 104-111, 2015.

6[2] Improvement of double-peaked spectra: Revisiting the combination of the Gaussian and the JONSWAP models, H Akbari, R Panahi, L Amani, Ocean Engineering 198, 106965, 2020

7[3] Multi-peaked directional wave spectra based on extensive field measurement data in the Gulf of Oman, M Adibzade, M Shafieefar, H Akbari, R Panahi, Ocean Engineering 230, 109057, 2021

8.      In Fig.11,12 why the number of waves are few (fewer than 10 waves0. It is better to show the mean value (between all the measured wave spectra) and show the standard deviations too.

9.      It is suggested to compare different methods in a separated section before the conclusion and discuss about their assumptions/ advantages and outcomes more completely. After a lot of data analysis, it is better to see a more reliable/important conclusion.

No comment about English writing.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

My comments have been addressed and my suggestion is the acceptance of the revised paper