Dear Håvard and co-authors, dear Editor Yves Bühler

please find my detailed review in the attached document.

Kind regards

Dear Håvard and co-authors, dear Editor Yves Bühler,

I thoroughly enjoyed reviewing this manuscript, which presents an impressive dataset with substantial depth. The insights derived from the data have the potential to significantly enhance our understanding of "surface-loading" stability test results.

While the manuscript holds promise, there are opportunities to enhance its readability and overall quality through a few modifications. Here are some general comments, with more specific feedback available in the attached document.

Introduction:

• The authors refer to several other papers. A clearer explanation of how these references relate to the current manuscript would enhance reader comprehension. A brief sentence or two elucidating the relevance of these references will improve the readability of this manuscript.
• The manuscript could benefit from explicitly stating what new contributions it brings to the existing body of knowledge, building upon already published material.

Methods:

• The methods section is well-crafted and easily understandable. However, a brief explanation of why peak force and loading rate were chosen as metrics for data analysis is missing. Incorporating elements from section 4.1.3 into the methods would provide valuable context.

Results:

• Consider including simple statistical analyses to assess the significance of differences between tapping levels. This addition would strengthen the overall robustness of the results.
• While the authors note a disparity in tapping force between women and men, the manuscript misses an opportunity to delve into the variability of tapping force within each gender group. Addressing this aspect would add depth to the analysis.

Discussion:

• A concise discussion regarding the relevance of the results within the snowpack load and stability assessment would be beneficial. This addition would help readers better grasp the broader implications of the findings.

For more detailed comments, please refer to the attached document.