The authors present a detailed wind tunnel study of the novel regenerative wind farm concept using lifting devices. the experiments are meticulously descriebd and the authors are commended on this. The study is relevant and novel. It does have certain limitations, which the authors highlight in earnest. The manuscript is well written overall and easy to follow.



My main comments are below while further, more minor, comments can be found in the attached file.

• There is a comparison with CFD results from a different published study, which however only has a 'broadly comparable' set up. This means the geometry is different and the Re number is orders of magnitude different. I understand there is good qualitative agreement between the experiments and the CFD results, but the relevant section seems to weaken the work rather than strengthen it. If the comparison with the published paper is significantly reduced in size and placed in the right context, that would help the present manuscript.
• The discussion on the staggered case can be deeper.
• Given the beautiful dataset, the analysis of flow features could be more substantial

The paper deals with the study of the wake flow of a multi rotor system with and without lifting devices.

The results are interesting and the analysis is convincing.

The paper is almost ready for publication, only a couple of small observations: 

 - Section 2.2 - line 67: a typo for multi-rotor system

 - Section 2.4 - line 122: the measurement devices are not clearly reported. The strain gauges are 10N range with a precision of 0.1N? Did you checked for a better calibration? Is the frequency of the horizontal strain gauge 1000Hz or 1Hz? is the frequency of the vertical bench scale only 1Hz?