Dear authors,


thank you for your efforts in getting the comments of the referees implemented. Most of the comments are carefully addressed. Still I have two remarks that should be dealt with:

1) The use of written English can be improved. In principle you may rely on the proof reading service that Copernicus provides, but in this case I would like to suggest that you might spar/discuss a little bit with the other authors to come up with improved English. This mainly holds for the text added with the update of the manuscript.

2) Regarding the content: a modification of the manuscript that should be dealt with better is that it is "too easy" and (in fact more important) also scientifically improper, to "just" add the words "Measurements where performed validating this approximation" (just below Equation 11) without showing that this measurements indeed prove that the two orthogonal components of the TKE perpendicular to the main wind direction are equal.
Showing this should either be done by referring to a scientific publication in which the measurements are published, that then can be quoted, giving also the quantitative proof of the agreement, or by adding a graph (made from the measurements) in the present manuscript that demonstrates that these TKE components are indeed equal.