English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This is a reply to the comments by Smith et al. (2020, hereafter SGM20) on the work of Li et al. (2020, hereafter LWL20) recently published in the  Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences . All the comments and concerns by SGM20 have been well addressed or clarified. We think that most of the comments by SGM20 are not in line with the intention of LWL20 and provide one-sided and thus little scientifically meaningful arguments. Regarding the comment on the adequacy of the methodology adopted in LWL20, we believe that the design of the thought (sensitivity) experiment is adequate to address the scientific issue under debate and helps quantify the contribution by the upward advection of the supergradient component of boundary layer wind to tropical cyclone intensification, which is shown to be very marginal. Note that we are open to accept any alternative, better methods to be used to further address this scientific issue.

journal of the atmospheric sciences

Reply to “Comments on ‘How Much Does the Upward Advection of the Supergradient Component of Boundary Layer Wind Contribute to Tropical Cyclone Intensification and Maximum Intensity?’”