Please address the outstanding minor points raised by the referees on the revised manuscript.

#1

The corrections proposed are sufficient to overcome the general reservations put forward in the first review. The manuscript has greatly improved and the three schematics included will hopefully help a wider audience to better understand the manuscript. Fig. 1 is certainly the hardest to understand and requires some reading of the caption by the reader, but as I do not have a better suggestion how to illustrates what happens in this section, it should be sufficient.
Apart from some minor corrections I recommend the manuscript for publication.

117 Inconsistency F_0 in eq. 4 and F_o in text
205 "available from http://cran.r-project.org/ (CRAN)" not necessary


#2

This manuscript, “Recalibrating Decadal Climate Predictions – What is an adequate model for the drift?” by Pasternack et al. (gmd-2020-191), makes important contribution to the field of bias correction (or adjustment) of near-term climate predictions. Although proposed novel methodology did not lead to substantial improvements in presently analysed fields over the pervious methods, clear exposition of the material put forward holds a potential that further more diverse application could reveal more benefit. I would like to see this paper published in GMD after the authors address few minor points listed below:

Lines 1-2: I would suggest: “.. such as multi-year to decadal forecasts are increasingly being used to guide adaptation measures and building of resilience.”

Line 2: I would suggest: “To ensure the utility of multi-member probabilistic predictions, …”

Line 3: I would suggest: “be corrected or at least reduced.”

Line 3: I would suggest: “.., such as the long-term forecast horizon, the …”

Line 6: I would suggest: “typical pairs of hindcasts and observations are available ..”

Line 17: I would suggest: “.. of initialized forecasts of the climate for the coming years.”

Line 18: I would suggest: “.. in model development, data assimilation for initialization and climate observations.”

Line 19: I would suggest: “.. near-term climate information and services for adaptation and ..”

Line 20. I would suggest: “.. DCPP and WCRP Grand Challenge on Near-Term Climate Prediction) and national ..”

Line 22. I would suggest: “Typically, ensemble climate predictions are framed …”

Line 26: Add some relevant references here: “.. state towards its own climatology (Maraun, 2016, Fuckar et al., 2014).”

Maraun, D. (2016), Bias Correcting Climate Change Simulations - a Critical Review, Curr Clim Change Rep 2, 211–220 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-016-0050-x

Fuckar, N. S., D. Volpi, V. Guemas, and F. J. Doblas-Reyes (2014), A posteriori adjustment of near-term climate predictions: Accounting for the drift dependence on the initial conditions, Geophys. Res. Lett., 41, 5200–5207, https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL060815.

Line 88: For the benefit of a wider audience add here a general forecast verification reference: “.. and the verifying observations (Jolliffe and Stephenson, 2012).”

Ian T. Jolliffe, and David B. Stephenson (2012), Forecast Verification – A Practitioner’s Guide in Atmospheric Science, 2nd ed., Wiley-Blackwell, 274 pp.

The Authors have suitably responded to the reviewers minor requests.