Dear Diego Joan Estrany and co-authors,

thank you very much again for submitting your brief communication manuscript
'Hydrogeomorphological analysis and modeling for a comprehensive understanding of flash-flood damaging processes: The 9th October 2018 event in North-eastern Mallorca'.

Two referee reports and a short comment from the scientific community are available which raises important issues with the current version of your manuscript. Major concerns exist regarding the links of individual aspects addressed in the study (meteorological, hydrological, geomorphological, damage, and risk data analysis) which appear to be considered rather separately. In addition, very detailed suggestions are made by the reviewers on how to improve the comprehensibility of your study and achieve a more clear structure. Reading your responses to these comments I am positive that a revised version of your manuscript will address these points appropriately.
In addition please make sure that legends and other information given in your Figures are readable (e.g. new Figure 1 with the workflow and Figure 8 (previously Figure 7) are not readable).

Please also note that this decision for major revisions does not necessarily imply acceptance of the manuscript in the journal NHESS, and it still depends on your reply
and edits to your manuscript, as well as on the reviewer comments of the revised version.

As a next step, I kindly ask you to provide a revised marked up (track changes) version of your manuscript to make clear how you include the changes in response to both referee reports and the short comment. Additionally, you have to upload the new version of the manuscript.

I look forward to receiving the revised version of your manuscript.

Best regards
Kai Schröter

Dear Diego Joan Estrany and co-authors,

thank you for the good work on revising the manuscript. Both reviewers confirmed that all points of concern in their reviews have been addressed. I agree with them that the structure of the paper has much improved and that it is now clear how the different steps of your analysis are linked. Therefore I am happy to accept it for publication in NHESS. Congratulations!
One of the referees recommends a thorough proof-reading by an English native speaker. Further, the font size of labels and legends is at the edge of readability, e.g. the inset in Figure 7. Please check if you can improve this.

Best regards
Kai Schröter