Comparative Application of Rain Gauge, Ground- and Space-Borne Radar Precipitation Products for Flood Simulations in a Dam Watershed in South Korea
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript entitled "Comparative Application of Rain Gauge, Ground- and Space-Borne Radar Precipitation Products for Flood Simulations in a Dam Watershed in South Korea" is part of a series of articles by the author on this field of knowledge and scientific research in which he activates.
Currently, the development of types of rainfall estimates for specific regions requires their appropriate implementation because they differ in terms of data collection, spatial coverage, and other characteristics. Ground-borne radar precipitation products are ideal for local and short-term monitoring, while space-borne radar products like IMERG are better suited for regional to global-scale precipitation assessments over longer periods.
The author shows careful attention to documentation, as he mentions TP-155, published by American Water Resources Association, in August 1996, which represents the beginning of the field along with other publications. In addition, the updated bibliography until 2021 is noteworthy. There are also a few papers related to the subject that should be added, so I suggest the author a simple search on this subject on the MDPI platform for the year 2022.
This manuscript is a timely contribution to the field.
Conclusions are presented in an appropriate fashion and are well supported by the data.
I agree with the publication in its current form, but suggest the following minor comments to the author to improve the presentation of the research results. These are only for an easier understanding by the readers of the research results.
Minor Revisions:
Comment 1: I suggest improving the resolution of the figures;
Comment 2: To improve the presentation of the results in Figures 10 and 11, I suggest that below each hydrograph, the modeling error should be presented (the difference between observed and simulated data);
Comment 3: In hydrology, it is important for the hydrometric stations to also show the frequency curves using the annual maximum flow to determine the range of validity of the modelling. Thus, I suggest its presentations in the appendix.
Congratulations on your results and I agree with publication in this form if the minor revision are answered.
Best Wishes,
The reviewer
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear author
I hope this email finds you well. I am writing to inform you that I have completed the review of your manuscript and I am pleased to provide you with my feedback.
First and foremost, I want to commend you on your hard work and dedication in producing such an interesting and thought-provoking piece of research. As a reviewer, I had the opportunity to delve into the details of your work, and I must say that it shows great promise in contributing to your field.
I have attached a file to this email that contains my detailed review. Within the document, you will find a comprehensive assessment of your manuscript, including both its strengths and areas that might benefit from further improvement. My intention is to offer constructive criticism to assist you in enhancing the quality and impact of your research.
Best regards,
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The manuscript compares the applications of observed, ground radar and space radar data for flood simulation. The present study will be useful for application in flied to forecast flood and take appropriate steps if coupled with hydrodynamic modeling. The paper nicely presents the application and concludes appropriately.
The quality of English is ok.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
