Dear authors,

Please consider the comments made by reviewer #2 on the revised manuscript.

I agree with the reviewer that some of your responses are too general, and require more specific writing about BARRA, rather than regional reanalysis generally in the intro.

I also find the interpretation of the O-A and O-B results not very clear. You now simply refer to supplementary material in the main text, this is much too vague. You need to explicitly refer to particular figures in tables in supplementary material and explain in a bit more detail, rather than leave the reader to figure it out.

I think it is perfectly reasonable to refer to other models which have similar grid-point storms, but as argued by the reviewer, i agree that it would be valuable for you to:

ii) properly explain its origin, (iii) warn the users particularly if they would like to have a local evaluation and (iv) convince the readers/users that this problem does not have a significant impact on the climate quality of the reanalysis

I think the paper can be accepted after making these minor revisions.

Thanks for your patience, and i look forward to the revised manuscript.
Regards
Jatin