The authors developed an analytical model for the velocity and turbulence in the wake of a wind turbine taking meandering into account. The overall topic is an important one, as there is a need for improving engineering models. However, some of the assumptions made in the derivation of the model seem to be poor choices, for example, using the Gaussian shape hypothesis of the velocity deficit in the near wake and the Gaussian distribution of the wake center in the far wake. Thus, excluding the veer impact is a big question even for the unstable case. The authors keep giving pieces of advice on how to develop the current model in many places, which provides a negative impression of the current work. Although the results are encouraging, and my overall impression of this manuscript is positive, the authors should do some revisions to re-evaluate their work objectively. 

1. The authors need to show a comparison between the new model with known models to evaluate the work.
2. The authors assumed that “It appears that the results are much better in the neutral case (in green) than in the unstable case (in red). This is likely due to the higher meandering in the unstable case, which would require a higher number of data to reach a converged PDF.” How can one trust the result if we do not have converged statistics, especially for turbulence?
3. The authors need to justify that the impact of the veers is negligible in the unstable case. 
4. The authors need to check if possible the impact of the turbulent intensity on the model, since the structure of the turbulence depends on that.

See attached comments.