A Moored Array Observation Dataset for Air-Sea&middot;Surface, Upper and Bottom Ocean in the Northern South China Sea during 2014&ndash;2015 (MASCS 1.0)

Zhang, Han; Chen, Dake; Liu, Tongya; Tian, Di; He, Min; Li, Qi; Liu, Jian

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-224

Preprints

https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-224

Preprints

15 Jul 2024

| 15 Jul 2024

Status: a revised version of this preprint was accepted for the journal ESSD and is expected to appear here in due course.

A Moored Array Observation Dataset for Air-Sea·Surface, Upper and Bottom Ocean in the Northern South China Sea during 2014–2015 (MASCS 1.0)

Han Zhang, Dake Chen, Tongya Liu, Di Tian, Min He, Qi Li, and Jian Liu

Abstract. This study reports a moored array dataset (MASCS 1.0) consisting of five buoys and four moorings in the northern South China Sea during 2014–2015. The dataset includes measurements of sea surface meteorological data using two sets of instruments: sea surface waves recorded using a wave recorder, temperature and salinity from the surface to a depth of 400 m, and at 10 m and 50 m above the ocean bottom using conductivity, temperature, and depth (CTD) recorders. It also includes currents from the surface to a depth of 850 m measured using acoustic Doppler current profilers (ADCPs) and at 10 m, 50 m, and 100 m above the surface measured using current meters. Additional measurements were taken for sea surface radiation, air visibility, chlorophyll, turbidity and chromophoric dissolved organic matter at Buoy 3, which was located at the center of the moored array. The dataset captures the effects of tropical cyclones Rammasun, Kalmaegi, Fung-wong, and Hagupit on the moored array, as well as the transition from summer to winter monsoon in the northern South China Sea. The data reveal oceanic processes in the upper and bottom ocean and are valuable for further studies on air-sea interactions and ocean dynamics. All the data described here are made publicly available from https://zenodo.org/records/12635331 (Zhang et al. 2024).

Received: 06 Jun 2024 – Discussion started: 15 Jul 2024

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this preprint. The responsibility to include appropriate place names lies with the authors.

Download & links

Han Zhang, Dake Chen, Tongya Liu, Di Tian, Min He, Qi Li, and Jian Liu

Status: closed

RC1:
'Comment on essd-2024-224', Luca Cocchi, 07 Aug 2024
The article by Zhang et al. provides an accurate description of oceanographic data acquired by using moorings and buoys deployed in the Northern South China Sea. The article is interesting and presents a valuable dataset to understand the impact of high-intensity sea-weather events such as monsoons and cyclones that affect this sea area.
The article is well written with a clear introduction and detailed data description. However, Section 3, although comprehensive, primarily presents a straightforward description of the results without offering critical analysis.
In Section 3.3, the authors state:
Sea surface waves observed at B1 and B4 also merit further explanation. The variations of sea surface waves from the two wave gauges at B1 and B4 are similar (Fig. 8), indicating that the characteristic of the sea surface waves at the observation array were comparable
This statement is not entirely accurate. A detailed observation reveals that Buoy 4 exhibits different behaviour compared to Buoy 1. This is particularly evident in the peak period plot. Buoy 4 shows a drastic variation in the period from June 14 to June 20 and on July 26. In contrast, Buoy 1 displays a smooth peak period plot during the same time frame. Additionally, there is a discrepancy in the mean wave direction during these periods. Why?
Please explain these observations and include this discussion in the main text.
A significant remark is the lack of discussion regarding the results. I would expect a conclusive interpretation of the seawater dynamics in the area. I suggest including a final general model derived from your oceanographic data. Anyway, a discussion emphasizing the potential applications of your data is required.
The abstract should be rewritten to include the major results and potential applications.
Minor remarks:
In many cases, the description of data references specific figures, but these references are not explicitly stated (e.g., lines 201-203).

Figures need to be improved: remove titles, add units to the color bars, and ensure a consistent figure style (e.g., units are reported along the Y-axis in Figures 5 and 6, but not in Figure 7).

See the annotated PDF for minor changes.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-224-RC1
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Han Zhang, 16 Sep 2024
  
  We thank the refree for the review of this manuscript and provides the comments and annotations that good for the improvement of this manuscript. We have revised the whole manuscript according to the comments and annotations, and the special responses are as follows:
  1) We thank the refree points out the discrepancy of sea surface waves observed by Buoy 1 and Buoy 4 in the period from June 14 to June 20 and on July 26, which we ignored before. After carefully checked air-sea processes during the two periods, we find it may due to tropical cyclones Hagibis which generated near the moored array near June 14 and tropical cyclone Matmo which may influenced the moored array near July 22 and then influenced local sea surface wave fields afterwards, we have added a sentence “However, B4 showed more drastic variation of peak period than B1 with different mean wave direction and wave spread during 14 to 20 July and near 26 July, which may due to the influence of tropical cyclones Habibis and Matmo.” to explain it in Section 3.3 in the revised manuscript. We have also added the information of Hagibis and Matmo in Figure 1.
  2) We thank the refree for the suggestions including the abstract, main text and discuccsion, which is valuable for the improvement of this manuscript. The revisions are as follows:
  For the abstract, it has been rewritten and include these sentences for major results and potential applications: “The data reveals air-sea interactions and oceanic processes in the upper and bottom ocean, it reveals the transition of air-sea interface and ocean conditions from summer to winter monsoon along with the effects of six tropical cyclones on the moored array, the multiscale processes such as air-sea fluxes, tides, internal waves and low-frequency flows were also recorded. The data is valuable and has multiple potential applications, including the analysis of the phenomena and mechanisms of air-sea interactions and ocean dynamics, as well as validation and improvement of local numerical model simulations, data reanalysis and assimilations.”.
  For the main text, the texts are revised according to the annotated PDF. Figure 5 and 6 were redrawn to add unit on colorbar, Figure 7 is redrawn to leave letter (a, b, c..) of the sub panels and move the title of graph to Y label.
  For the discussion, we add following sentences in the last paragraph of the conclusion section (Section 5) to give a discussion and conclusive interpretation of the air-sea surface and seawater dynamics in the area: “The tropical cyclones increased sea surface wind speed, enhanced sea surface wave height and near-surface ocean currents, cooled sea surface water and air temperature, induced near-inertial waves as well as near-bottom currents. The moored array also experienced a transition from the summer to winter monsoons, with prevailing nearly south wind (approximately 200°) and wave (approximately 180°) with sea surface significant wave height <2 m and peak period <10 s from late July to mid-August, then shifted to nearly northeast wind (approximately 20°‒80°) and east wave (approximately 90°) with sea surface significant wave height >3 m and peak period <10 s after October. In addition, ocean data may have recorded multiscale air-sea interactions and ocean processes, such as air-sea heat and momentum fluxes, ocean tides, internal waves, seasonal variations in temperature, salinity, and flows, as well as background processes, such as mesoscale eddies and local circulations. The data has already been used for the analysis of the air-sea and ocean variations on the moored array (Quan et al., 2022; He et al., 2024), validation of ocean (Zhang et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2020; Lu et al., 2023) and air-sea coupled (Wu et al., 2020; Lim Kam Sian et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2024) model simulation, check the parameterization of air-sea surface flux (Zhang et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2024), investigate the mechanisms and theory of ocean response to tropical cyclones (Hong et al., 2022; Zhang 2023). The dataset has the potential for further studies in these fields, while may also be used for other fields such as data reanalysis and assimilations.”
  References:
  Liu, F., Zhang, H., Ming, J., Zheng, J., Tian, D., and Chen, D.: Importance of Precipitation on the Upper Ocean Salinity Response to Typhoon Kalmaegi (2014), Water, 12, 614, doi:10.3390/w12020614, 2020.
  Liu F, Toumi R, Zhang H, Chen D. Impact of Precipitation on Ocean Responses during Tropical Cyclone. Journal of Physical Oceanography, 2024, 54(3): 895–909. doi:10.1175/jpo-d-23-0138.1, 2024.
  Lu, X., Dong, C., Xu, Z., Yang, J., Zhang, H., Wang, D., and Chen, D.: Effects of numerical model's horizontal resolution on the vertical transport of near-inertial energy, Deep-Sea Res. II, 207, 105223, doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2022.105223, 2023.
  Quan, Q., Liu, Z., Yang, Y., Cai, Z., Zhang, H., and Liu, X.: Characterization of intraseasonal fluctuations in the abyssal South China Sea: An insight into the energy pathway, Prog. Oceanogr., 206, 102829, doi:10.1016/j.pocean.2022.102829, 2022.
  He, Y., Lin, X., Han, G., Liu, Y., and Zhang, H.: The different dynamic influences of Typhoon Kalmaegi on two pre-existing anticyclonic ocean eddies, Ocean Sci., 20, 621–637, doi:10.5194/os-20-621-2024, 2024.
  Hong, W., Zhou, L., Xie, X., Zhang, H., and Liang, C.: Modified parameterization for near-inertial waves, Acta Oceanol. Sin., 41, 41-53, doi:10.1007/s13131-022-2012-6, 2022.
  Zhang, H.: Modulation of Upper Ocean Vertical Temperature Structure and Heat Content by a Fast-Moving Tropical Cyclone, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 53, 493–508, doi:10.1175/JPO-D-22-0132.1, 2023.
  Zhang, H., Chen, D., Zhou, L., Liu, X., Ding, T., and Zhou, B.: Upper ocean response to typhoon Kalmaegi (2014), J. Geophys. Res. Oceans, 121, 6520–6535, doi:10.1002/2016jc012064, 2016.
  Zhang, H., Liu, X., Wu, R., Chen, D., Zhang, D., Shang, X., Wang, Y., Song, X., Jin, W., Yu, L., Qi, Y., Tian, D., and Zhang, W.: Sea surface current response patterns to tropical cyclones, Journal of Marine Systems, 208, 103345, doi:10.1016/j.jmarsys.2020.103345, 2020.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-224-AC1
- AC4: 'Reply on RC1', Han Zhang, 20 Sep 2024
  
  Attached zip file includes the revised figure 5-7 according to your comments and the comments of refree 2.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-224-AC4
RC2:
'Comment on essd-2024-224', Anonymous Referee #2, 23 Aug 2024

Review of „A Moored Array Observation Dataset for Air-Sea·Surface, Upperand Bottom Ocean in the Northern South China Sea during 2014–2015 (MASCS 1.0)”by Zhang et al
The dataset presented in this paper consists of an array of 5 surface buoys and 4 ocean moorings in the northern South China Sea, a region that is frequently impacted by tropical cyclones. The dataset is based on a considerable logistical effort and results in an interesting set of meteorological and ocean observations. The presentation and description of the experiment and data is fine but would significantly benefit from including more details and a more thorough link between text and figures. I am missing a more thorough introduction into the circulation and geographical setting of the study region for the general reader. A better map with circulation features and names would help there. More details on the sensors (manufacturer, model, uncertainties etc.) should be provided in the dataset description chapter. Some of the data displayed in the figures is very spiky and obviously erroneous, so I would recommend to apply some kind of quality control and not only show the raw data. It is ok to publish raw data in the data files, but some sort of quality considerations should be provided.
I further recommend to the authors to improve the text and to better guide the reader through the paper. In the current version, several observations are pointed out but are not directly linked to figures, or require enhanced efforts from the reader to find the information in the figures, which distracts the flow of the paper. Some visual aids in the figures, such as for instance text and arrows pointing to cyclone periods would help. The conclusion chapter does not really offer actual conclusions and should be improved.
Overall, I think it is an interesting dataset, but I would strongly recommend some of the above-mentioned improvements before the paper should be published.
Below are some more specific comments.
Title: “Upper and bottom ocean” sounds not ideal
21: you mean above the seafloor?
30: transport heat and salt: from where? More information needed
31: background circulation: here it would be very helpful to include a map with circulation arrows and geographic features, otherwise the unfamiliar reader has no reference for orientation
57: the deployment times are unusual. Perhaps provide more detail on deployment and recoveries, also the ship used. Was it not possible to recover all moorings/buoys at the same time?
66: it would be better to provide the radius of buoy movement in km, not in °longitude. As they were tethered, the movement must have been very limited
70: rather than stating when a ship was dispatched, I would state when the buoy was picked up. Fig 2 shows the buoy locations but does not show when the buoy was not free drifting anymore. Also, more information on the mooring design would be of interest (anchor weight, tether length etc.). I assume with tropical storms putting a lot of force on the moorings.
Table 2, “Current 1”: you mention layer 1, 2 and 3. Please provide more details in the text or a reference in the figure on where or what these layers are, otherwise it is difficult to follow
103: rain gauge (throughout text)
107: what is wave temperature? Do you mean air temperature?
116: “were lost during observations”. What do you mean? They were lost during the deployment period?
108-127: I think the paper needs more details on the instruments used here. It is only mentioned that you used SBE instruments, be more specific
Data shown in Fig 4, chapter 3.1: I think it is somewhat confusing to show the two datasets like that, as one of the two met-systems is clearly erroneous. Perhaps the authors could check against reanalysis data on wind direction and air pressure, and evaluate the performance of these two systems.
Figure 3 and instrument depth information: how far below the surface did the moorings actually reach? It would be very helpful to state the nominal depths of the ADCPs in the table as well. Also bin sizes of ADCPs are missing.
184: how do you know it was near-inertial waves?
Fig 5 and 6: indicate instrument depths perhaps with some tickmarks on the yaxis. Display the depths of the 300 and 75 kHz bins. What happened after 10 November, why did the record stop there?
186-188: here it would be good to include a visual reference to the cyclones in Fig 5 so that it is easier to connect the text to the figures
189: downward propagation of near-inertial waves: where do we see that in the figure?
196: it looks more like a salinity increase from summer to winter, and the reference is Fig 6 not Fig 5
Fig 7a: why not use the more common unit dbar to display pressure in the ocean?
215-216: the previously intended water depth is not important here. It is normal that the actual depth differs from the original plan
Chapter 3.3: the paper in general needs a closer coupling between text and figures. This paragraph mentions summer monsoon and cyclones with respect to wave height. A short visual pointer in Fig 8 to where the reader should be looking would be very helpful. Also, while it is good to provide the raw data for the data publication, a little bit of quality control should be done in order to display cleaner figures (especially fig 4 and 8, 9, 10).
260: air visibility is in km
Chapter 3.4: again, more visual aids are needed in the figure to follow. Anything the text mentions should be found in the figures, otherwise it is difficult to follow and the reader loses interest. Where do we see high pressure of 1100 hPa as mentioned in line 253?
Conclusion-chapter: this chapter is not really a conclusion-chapter. Much of the information belongs in the data description. In fact, some details provided here are missing in the data chapter, such as details on the wave recorder and other instruments. This chapter should in my opinion better address some of the major achievements and shortcomings of the experiment and some pointers and links to scientific learnings and studies that can be done with this dataset.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-224-RC2
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Han Zhang, 20 Sep 2024
  
  We thank the refree for the careful review and comments, which are beneficial for the improvement of this manuscript. We have revised the whole manuscript according to the comments, the special responses are as follows:
  (1) The writing of this whole manuscript is revised, with the revisions as follows:
  The abstract is rewritten, especially the following sentences are revised to include the main results and potential applications: “The dataset captures … and ocean dynamics” are revised to “The data reveals air-sea interactions and oceanic processes in the upper and bottom ocean, especially the transition of air-sea interface and ocean conditions from summer to winter monsoon along with the effects of six tropical cyclones on the moored array. The multiscale processes such as air-sea fluxes, tides, internal waves and low-frequency flows were also recorded. The data is valuable and has multiple potential applications, including analysis of the phenomena and mechanisms of air-sea interactions and ocean dynamics, as well as validation and improvement of numerical model simulations, data reanalysis and assimilations.”
  The main body of the manuscript has been revised based on the refree’s comments. Especially, the links between text and figures are improved by adding the words such as ‘(Fig. 1a)’ to ‘(Fig. 10j)’ to indicate which figure or subfigure the sentences refer to. The time when the tropical cyclones (TCs) were closet to the moored stations were added in Figure 4 to 10 with dashed lines and name of the TCs, for the reader to better view the influence of TCs and following the text. The explanation of deployment, maintenance and recovery of the moored stations are added in chapter 2.1. The dataset description chapter (chapter 2.2) is enriched to give more details of the observation instruments and the data. Other minor revisions are done based on the refree’s comments.
  The conclusion chapter is rewritten, the details of the observation and instruments have been moved and merged into dataset description chapter (chapter 2.2). The conclusion chapter is enriched to explain that the dataset captures the influence of 6 tropical cyclones and the transition of summer monsoon to winter monsoon during 2014-2015. A paragraph is also added to explain the potential applications of the dataset. We think that the dataset can be used for the study of multiscale air-sea interaction and oceanic processes, such as phenomenon and mechanism studies, numerical simulations and data reanalysis or assimilations.
  (2) All the figures and tables in the manuscript are replotted or modified, with the revision as follows:
  Information of tropical cyclone (TC) Hagibis and Matmo are add in Figure 1a, as the two TCs may also influenced the moored array during observation.
  The information of observation time range in table 1 is revised according to the voyage records for the deployment and recovery of the moored stations. The anchor weight, tether length and the estimated depth of ADCPs on the moorings are added in Figure 1b and Figure 3. The information of bin sizes of ADCPs are added in Table 2. The horizontal movement of buoy 3 near its initial position is also added in Figure 3.
  Figures 4-10 are replotted with the time range during the deployment and recovery of the stations. That is to say, the data before deployment and after recovery are not shown in figures now. The data are simply quality controlled with the missing data or unreasonable data removed in Figures 4-10. Furthermore, the time when the TCs closest to the moored stations are added with dashed lines and TC names for the readers easier to see the influence of the TCs.
  Reanalysis data from ECMWF Reanalysis v5 (ERA5, https://www.ecmwf.int/en/forecasts/dataset/ecmwf-reanalysis-v5) are added in Figure 4 (green lines) to check the performance of the two meteorological observation systems.
  Figure 5b is redrawn with the interpolation of currents corrected, while time variation of the depth of the two ADCPs on mooring 2 is also added (black line).
  (3) For the sketch of background circulation in the South China Sea, we plot Figure R1 for the map with circulation arrows and geographic features, which is drawn according the Figure 1 in Cai et al., (2020), which represent the upper, middle and bottom background circulation in the South China Sea. However, as study of background circulations in are not the goal of this manuscript, we may not put it into the main body of this manuscript.
  (4) Attached zip file contains the revised figures 1-10 and figure R1.
  Reference:
  Cai, Z., Gan, J., Liu, Z., Hui, C. R., and Li, J.: Progress on the formation dynamics of the layered circulation in the South China Sea, Prog. Oceanogr, 181, 102246, doi:10.1016/j.pocean.2019.102246, 2020.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-224-AC2
EC1:
'Comment on essd-2024-224', Sabine Schmidt, 16 Sep 2024

Dear Authors,

All comments need to be addressed in the public discussion before a revised manuscript can be considered for final publication. In short, the reviewers' comments tend to be positive in terms of the interest of the dataset, but underline the need for improvement. In particular, you should explain how you intend to address the comments:

- The abstract should be rewritten to include the main results and potential applications.

- Discussion: develop the potential applications of the dataset.

- There is a need to improve the link between text and figures (see comments of reviewer #2).

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-224-EC1
- AC3: 'Reply on EC1', Han Zhang, 20 Sep 2024
  
  Thank you for the comments. The text of the whole manuscript is revised and the figures are redrawn in the revised manuscript, the response to particular comments are as follows:
  The abstract is rewritten, especially the following sentences are revised to include the main results and potential applications: “The dataset captures … and ocean dynamics” are revised to “The data reveals air-sea interactions and oceanic processes in the upper and bottom ocean, especially the transition of air-sea interface and ocean conditions from summer to winter monsoon along with the effects of six tropical cyclones on the moored array. The multiscale processes such as air-sea fluxes, tides, internal waves and low-frequency flows were also recorded. The data is valuable and has multiple potential applications, including analysis of the phenomena and mechanisms of air-sea interactions and ocean dynamics, as well as validation and improvement of numerical model simulations, data reanalysis and assimilations.”
  For the discussion, following sentences are added to explain the potential applications of the dataset: “In addition, ocean data may have recorded multiscale air-sea interactions and ocean processes, such as air-sea heat and momentum fluxes, ocean tides, internal waves, seasonal variations in temperature, salinity, and flows, as well as background processes, such as mesoscale eddies and local circulations. The data has already been used for the analysis of the air-sea and ocean variations on the moored array (Quan et al., 2022; He et al., 2024), validation of ocean (Zhang et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2020; Lu et al., 2023) and air-sea coupled (Wu et al., 2020; Lim Kam Sian et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2024) model simulation, check the parameterization of air-sea surface flux (Zhang et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2024), investigate the mechanisms and theory of ocean response to tropical cyclones (Hong et al., 2022; Zhang 2023). The dataset has the potential for further studies in these fields, while may also be used for other fields such as data reanalysis and assimilations.”
  For the improvement of the link between text and figures the link between text and figures are improved in the whole manuscript by adding the words such as ‘(Fig. 1a)’ to ‘(Fig. 10j)’ to indicate which figure or subfigure the sentences refer to. The time when the tropical cyclones (TCs) were closet to the moored stations were added in Figure 4 to 10 which dashed lines and name of the TCs, for the reader to better view the influence of TCs and following the text.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-224-AC3

Status: closed

RC1:
'Comment on essd-2024-224', Luca Cocchi, 07 Aug 2024
The article by Zhang et al. provides an accurate description of oceanographic data acquired by using moorings and buoys deployed in the Northern South China Sea. The article is interesting and presents a valuable dataset to understand the impact of high-intensity sea-weather events such as monsoons and cyclones that affect this sea area.
The article is well written with a clear introduction and detailed data description. However, Section 3, although comprehensive, primarily presents a straightforward description of the results without offering critical analysis.
In Section 3.3, the authors state:
Sea surface waves observed at B1 and B4 also merit further explanation. The variations of sea surface waves from the two wave gauges at B1 and B4 are similar (Fig. 8), indicating that the characteristic of the sea surface waves at the observation array were comparable
This statement is not entirely accurate. A detailed observation reveals that Buoy 4 exhibits different behaviour compared to Buoy 1. This is particularly evident in the peak period plot. Buoy 4 shows a drastic variation in the period from June 14 to June 20 and on July 26. In contrast, Buoy 1 displays a smooth peak period plot during the same time frame. Additionally, there is a discrepancy in the mean wave direction during these periods. Why?
Please explain these observations and include this discussion in the main text.
A significant remark is the lack of discussion regarding the results. I would expect a conclusive interpretation of the seawater dynamics in the area. I suggest including a final general model derived from your oceanographic data. Anyway, a discussion emphasizing the potential applications of your data is required.
The abstract should be rewritten to include the major results and potential applications.
Minor remarks:
In many cases, the description of data references specific figures, but these references are not explicitly stated (e.g., lines 201-203).

Figures need to be improved: remove titles, add units to the color bars, and ensure a consistent figure style (e.g., units are reported along the Y-axis in Figures 5 and 6, but not in Figure 7).

See the annotated PDF for minor changes.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-224-RC1
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Han Zhang, 16 Sep 2024
  
  We thank the refree for the review of this manuscript and provides the comments and annotations that good for the improvement of this manuscript. We have revised the whole manuscript according to the comments and annotations, and the special responses are as follows:
  1) We thank the refree points out the discrepancy of sea surface waves observed by Buoy 1 and Buoy 4 in the period from June 14 to June 20 and on July 26, which we ignored before. After carefully checked air-sea processes during the two periods, we find it may due to tropical cyclones Hagibis which generated near the moored array near June 14 and tropical cyclone Matmo which may influenced the moored array near July 22 and then influenced local sea surface wave fields afterwards, we have added a sentence “However, B4 showed more drastic variation of peak period than B1 with different mean wave direction and wave spread during 14 to 20 July and near 26 July, which may due to the influence of tropical cyclones Habibis and Matmo.” to explain it in Section 3.3 in the revised manuscript. We have also added the information of Hagibis and Matmo in Figure 1.
  2) We thank the refree for the suggestions including the abstract, main text and discuccsion, which is valuable for the improvement of this manuscript. The revisions are as follows:
  For the abstract, it has been rewritten and include these sentences for major results and potential applications: “The data reveals air-sea interactions and oceanic processes in the upper and bottom ocean, it reveals the transition of air-sea interface and ocean conditions from summer to winter monsoon along with the effects of six tropical cyclones on the moored array, the multiscale processes such as air-sea fluxes, tides, internal waves and low-frequency flows were also recorded. The data is valuable and has multiple potential applications, including the analysis of the phenomena and mechanisms of air-sea interactions and ocean dynamics, as well as validation and improvement of local numerical model simulations, data reanalysis and assimilations.”.
  For the main text, the texts are revised according to the annotated PDF. Figure 5 and 6 were redrawn to add unit on colorbar, Figure 7 is redrawn to leave letter (a, b, c..) of the sub panels and move the title of graph to Y label.
  For the discussion, we add following sentences in the last paragraph of the conclusion section (Section 5) to give a discussion and conclusive interpretation of the air-sea surface and seawater dynamics in the area: “The tropical cyclones increased sea surface wind speed, enhanced sea surface wave height and near-surface ocean currents, cooled sea surface water and air temperature, induced near-inertial waves as well as near-bottom currents. The moored array also experienced a transition from the summer to winter monsoons, with prevailing nearly south wind (approximately 200°) and wave (approximately 180°) with sea surface significant wave height <2 m and peak period <10 s from late July to mid-August, then shifted to nearly northeast wind (approximately 20°‒80°) and east wave (approximately 90°) with sea surface significant wave height >3 m and peak period <10 s after October. In addition, ocean data may have recorded multiscale air-sea interactions and ocean processes, such as air-sea heat and momentum fluxes, ocean tides, internal waves, seasonal variations in temperature, salinity, and flows, as well as background processes, such as mesoscale eddies and local circulations. The data has already been used for the analysis of the air-sea and ocean variations on the moored array (Quan et al., 2022; He et al., 2024), validation of ocean (Zhang et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2020; Lu et al., 2023) and air-sea coupled (Wu et al., 2020; Lim Kam Sian et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2024) model simulation, check the parameterization of air-sea surface flux (Zhang et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2024), investigate the mechanisms and theory of ocean response to tropical cyclones (Hong et al., 2022; Zhang 2023). The dataset has the potential for further studies in these fields, while may also be used for other fields such as data reanalysis and assimilations.”
  References:
  Liu, F., Zhang, H., Ming, J., Zheng, J., Tian, D., and Chen, D.: Importance of Precipitation on the Upper Ocean Salinity Response to Typhoon Kalmaegi (2014), Water, 12, 614, doi:10.3390/w12020614, 2020.
  Liu F, Toumi R, Zhang H, Chen D. Impact of Precipitation on Ocean Responses during Tropical Cyclone. Journal of Physical Oceanography, 2024, 54(3): 895–909. doi:10.1175/jpo-d-23-0138.1, 2024.
  Lu, X., Dong, C., Xu, Z., Yang, J., Zhang, H., Wang, D., and Chen, D.: Effects of numerical model's horizontal resolution on the vertical transport of near-inertial energy, Deep-Sea Res. II, 207, 105223, doi:10.1016/j.dsr2.2022.105223, 2023.
  Quan, Q., Liu, Z., Yang, Y., Cai, Z., Zhang, H., and Liu, X.: Characterization of intraseasonal fluctuations in the abyssal South China Sea: An insight into the energy pathway, Prog. Oceanogr., 206, 102829, doi:10.1016/j.pocean.2022.102829, 2022.
  He, Y., Lin, X., Han, G., Liu, Y., and Zhang, H.: The different dynamic influences of Typhoon Kalmaegi on two pre-existing anticyclonic ocean eddies, Ocean Sci., 20, 621–637, doi:10.5194/os-20-621-2024, 2024.
  Hong, W., Zhou, L., Xie, X., Zhang, H., and Liang, C.: Modified parameterization for near-inertial waves, Acta Oceanol. Sin., 41, 41-53, doi:10.1007/s13131-022-2012-6, 2022.
  Zhang, H.: Modulation of Upper Ocean Vertical Temperature Structure and Heat Content by a Fast-Moving Tropical Cyclone, J. Phys. Oceanogr., 53, 493–508, doi:10.1175/JPO-D-22-0132.1, 2023.
  Zhang, H., Chen, D., Zhou, L., Liu, X., Ding, T., and Zhou, B.: Upper ocean response to typhoon Kalmaegi (2014), J. Geophys. Res. Oceans, 121, 6520–6535, doi:10.1002/2016jc012064, 2016.
  Zhang, H., Liu, X., Wu, R., Chen, D., Zhang, D., Shang, X., Wang, Y., Song, X., Jin, W., Yu, L., Qi, Y., Tian, D., and Zhang, W.: Sea surface current response patterns to tropical cyclones, Journal of Marine Systems, 208, 103345, doi:10.1016/j.jmarsys.2020.103345, 2020.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-224-AC1
- AC4: 'Reply on RC1', Han Zhang, 20 Sep 2024
  
  Attached zip file includes the revised figure 5-7 according to your comments and the comments of refree 2.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-224-AC4
RC2:
'Comment on essd-2024-224', Anonymous Referee #2, 23 Aug 2024

Review of „A Moored Array Observation Dataset for Air-Sea·Surface, Upperand Bottom Ocean in the Northern South China Sea during 2014–2015 (MASCS 1.0)”by Zhang et al
The dataset presented in this paper consists of an array of 5 surface buoys and 4 ocean moorings in the northern South China Sea, a region that is frequently impacted by tropical cyclones. The dataset is based on a considerable logistical effort and results in an interesting set of meteorological and ocean observations. The presentation and description of the experiment and data is fine but would significantly benefit from including more details and a more thorough link between text and figures. I am missing a more thorough introduction into the circulation and geographical setting of the study region for the general reader. A better map with circulation features and names would help there. More details on the sensors (manufacturer, model, uncertainties etc.) should be provided in the dataset description chapter. Some of the data displayed in the figures is very spiky and obviously erroneous, so I would recommend to apply some kind of quality control and not only show the raw data. It is ok to publish raw data in the data files, but some sort of quality considerations should be provided.
I further recommend to the authors to improve the text and to better guide the reader through the paper. In the current version, several observations are pointed out but are not directly linked to figures, or require enhanced efforts from the reader to find the information in the figures, which distracts the flow of the paper. Some visual aids in the figures, such as for instance text and arrows pointing to cyclone periods would help. The conclusion chapter does not really offer actual conclusions and should be improved.
Overall, I think it is an interesting dataset, but I would strongly recommend some of the above-mentioned improvements before the paper should be published.
Below are some more specific comments.
Title: “Upper and bottom ocean” sounds not ideal
21: you mean above the seafloor?
30: transport heat and salt: from where? More information needed
31: background circulation: here it would be very helpful to include a map with circulation arrows and geographic features, otherwise the unfamiliar reader has no reference for orientation
57: the deployment times are unusual. Perhaps provide more detail on deployment and recoveries, also the ship used. Was it not possible to recover all moorings/buoys at the same time?
66: it would be better to provide the radius of buoy movement in km, not in °longitude. As they were tethered, the movement must have been very limited
70: rather than stating when a ship was dispatched, I would state when the buoy was picked up. Fig 2 shows the buoy locations but does not show when the buoy was not free drifting anymore. Also, more information on the mooring design would be of interest (anchor weight, tether length etc.). I assume with tropical storms putting a lot of force on the moorings.
Table 2, “Current 1”: you mention layer 1, 2 and 3. Please provide more details in the text or a reference in the figure on where or what these layers are, otherwise it is difficult to follow
103: rain gauge (throughout text)
107: what is wave temperature? Do you mean air temperature?
116: “were lost during observations”. What do you mean? They were lost during the deployment period?
108-127: I think the paper needs more details on the instruments used here. It is only mentioned that you used SBE instruments, be more specific
Data shown in Fig 4, chapter 3.1: I think it is somewhat confusing to show the two datasets like that, as one of the two met-systems is clearly erroneous. Perhaps the authors could check against reanalysis data on wind direction and air pressure, and evaluate the performance of these two systems.
Figure 3 and instrument depth information: how far below the surface did the moorings actually reach? It would be very helpful to state the nominal depths of the ADCPs in the table as well. Also bin sizes of ADCPs are missing.
184: how do you know it was near-inertial waves?
Fig 5 and 6: indicate instrument depths perhaps with some tickmarks on the yaxis. Display the depths of the 300 and 75 kHz bins. What happened after 10 November, why did the record stop there?
186-188: here it would be good to include a visual reference to the cyclones in Fig 5 so that it is easier to connect the text to the figures
189: downward propagation of near-inertial waves: where do we see that in the figure?
196: it looks more like a salinity increase from summer to winter, and the reference is Fig 6 not Fig 5
Fig 7a: why not use the more common unit dbar to display pressure in the ocean?
215-216: the previously intended water depth is not important here. It is normal that the actual depth differs from the original plan
Chapter 3.3: the paper in general needs a closer coupling between text and figures. This paragraph mentions summer monsoon and cyclones with respect to wave height. A short visual pointer in Fig 8 to where the reader should be looking would be very helpful. Also, while it is good to provide the raw data for the data publication, a little bit of quality control should be done in order to display cleaner figures (especially fig 4 and 8, 9, 10).
260: air visibility is in km
Chapter 3.4: again, more visual aids are needed in the figure to follow. Anything the text mentions should be found in the figures, otherwise it is difficult to follow and the reader loses interest. Where do we see high pressure of 1100 hPa as mentioned in line 253?
Conclusion-chapter: this chapter is not really a conclusion-chapter. Much of the information belongs in the data description. In fact, some details provided here are missing in the data chapter, such as details on the wave recorder and other instruments. This chapter should in my opinion better address some of the major achievements and shortcomings of the experiment and some pointers and links to scientific learnings and studies that can be done with this dataset.

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-224-RC2
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Han Zhang, 20 Sep 2024
  
  We thank the refree for the careful review and comments, which are beneficial for the improvement of this manuscript. We have revised the whole manuscript according to the comments, the special responses are as follows:
  (1) The writing of this whole manuscript is revised, with the revisions as follows:
  The abstract is rewritten, especially the following sentences are revised to include the main results and potential applications: “The dataset captures … and ocean dynamics” are revised to “The data reveals air-sea interactions and oceanic processes in the upper and bottom ocean, especially the transition of air-sea interface and ocean conditions from summer to winter monsoon along with the effects of six tropical cyclones on the moored array. The multiscale processes such as air-sea fluxes, tides, internal waves and low-frequency flows were also recorded. The data is valuable and has multiple potential applications, including analysis of the phenomena and mechanisms of air-sea interactions and ocean dynamics, as well as validation and improvement of numerical model simulations, data reanalysis and assimilations.”
  The main body of the manuscript has been revised based on the refree’s comments. Especially, the links between text and figures are improved by adding the words such as ‘(Fig. 1a)’ to ‘(Fig. 10j)’ to indicate which figure or subfigure the sentences refer to. The time when the tropical cyclones (TCs) were closet to the moored stations were added in Figure 4 to 10 with dashed lines and name of the TCs, for the reader to better view the influence of TCs and following the text. The explanation of deployment, maintenance and recovery of the moored stations are added in chapter 2.1. The dataset description chapter (chapter 2.2) is enriched to give more details of the observation instruments and the data. Other minor revisions are done based on the refree’s comments.
  The conclusion chapter is rewritten, the details of the observation and instruments have been moved and merged into dataset description chapter (chapter 2.2). The conclusion chapter is enriched to explain that the dataset captures the influence of 6 tropical cyclones and the transition of summer monsoon to winter monsoon during 2014-2015. A paragraph is also added to explain the potential applications of the dataset. We think that the dataset can be used for the study of multiscale air-sea interaction and oceanic processes, such as phenomenon and mechanism studies, numerical simulations and data reanalysis or assimilations.
  (2) All the figures and tables in the manuscript are replotted or modified, with the revision as follows:
  Information of tropical cyclone (TC) Hagibis and Matmo are add in Figure 1a, as the two TCs may also influenced the moored array during observation.
  The information of observation time range in table 1 is revised according to the voyage records for the deployment and recovery of the moored stations. The anchor weight, tether length and the estimated depth of ADCPs on the moorings are added in Figure 1b and Figure 3. The information of bin sizes of ADCPs are added in Table 2. The horizontal movement of buoy 3 near its initial position is also added in Figure 3.
  Figures 4-10 are replotted with the time range during the deployment and recovery of the stations. That is to say, the data before deployment and after recovery are not shown in figures now. The data are simply quality controlled with the missing data or unreasonable data removed in Figures 4-10. Furthermore, the time when the TCs closest to the moored stations are added with dashed lines and TC names for the readers easier to see the influence of the TCs.
  Reanalysis data from ECMWF Reanalysis v5 (ERA5, https://www.ecmwf.int/en/forecasts/dataset/ecmwf-reanalysis-v5) are added in Figure 4 (green lines) to check the performance of the two meteorological observation systems.
  Figure 5b is redrawn with the interpolation of currents corrected, while time variation of the depth of the two ADCPs on mooring 2 is also added (black line).
  (3) For the sketch of background circulation in the South China Sea, we plot Figure R1 for the map with circulation arrows and geographic features, which is drawn according the Figure 1 in Cai et al., (2020), which represent the upper, middle and bottom background circulation in the South China Sea. However, as study of background circulations in are not the goal of this manuscript, we may not put it into the main body of this manuscript.
  (4) Attached zip file contains the revised figures 1-10 and figure R1.
  Reference:
  Cai, Z., Gan, J., Liu, Z., Hui, C. R., and Li, J.: Progress on the formation dynamics of the layered circulation in the South China Sea, Prog. Oceanogr, 181, 102246, doi:10.1016/j.pocean.2019.102246, 2020.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-224-AC2
EC1:
'Comment on essd-2024-224', Sabine Schmidt, 16 Sep 2024

Dear Authors,

All comments need to be addressed in the public discussion before a revised manuscript can be considered for final publication. In short, the reviewers' comments tend to be positive in terms of the interest of the dataset, but underline the need for improvement. In particular, you should explain how you intend to address the comments:

- The abstract should be rewritten to include the main results and potential applications.

- Discussion: develop the potential applications of the dataset.

- There is a need to improve the link between text and figures (see comments of reviewer #2).

Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-224-EC1
- AC3: 'Reply on EC1', Han Zhang, 20 Sep 2024
  
  Thank you for the comments. The text of the whole manuscript is revised and the figures are redrawn in the revised manuscript, the response to particular comments are as follows:
  The abstract is rewritten, especially the following sentences are revised to include the main results and potential applications: “The dataset captures … and ocean dynamics” are revised to “The data reveals air-sea interactions and oceanic processes in the upper and bottom ocean, especially the transition of air-sea interface and ocean conditions from summer to winter monsoon along with the effects of six tropical cyclones on the moored array. The multiscale processes such as air-sea fluxes, tides, internal waves and low-frequency flows were also recorded. The data is valuable and has multiple potential applications, including analysis of the phenomena and mechanisms of air-sea interactions and ocean dynamics, as well as validation and improvement of numerical model simulations, data reanalysis and assimilations.”
  For the discussion, following sentences are added to explain the potential applications of the dataset: “In addition, ocean data may have recorded multiscale air-sea interactions and ocean processes, such as air-sea heat and momentum fluxes, ocean tides, internal waves, seasonal variations in temperature, salinity, and flows, as well as background processes, such as mesoscale eddies and local circulations. The data has already been used for the analysis of the air-sea and ocean variations on the moored array (Quan et al., 2022; He et al., 2024), validation of ocean (Zhang et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2020; Lu et al., 2023) and air-sea coupled (Wu et al., 2020; Lim Kam Sian et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2024) model simulation, check the parameterization of air-sea surface flux (Zhang et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2024), investigate the mechanisms and theory of ocean response to tropical cyclones (Hong et al., 2022; Zhang 2023). The dataset has the potential for further studies in these fields, while may also be used for other fields such as data reanalysis and assimilations.”
  For the improvement of the link between text and figures the link between text and figures are improved in the whole manuscript by adding the words such as ‘(Fig. 1a)’ to ‘(Fig. 10j)’ to indicate which figure or subfigure the sentences refer to. The time when the tropical cyclones (TCs) were closet to the moored stations were added in Figure 4 to 10 which dashed lines and name of the TCs, for the reader to better view the influence of TCs and following the text.
  
  Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-224-AC3

Han Zhang, Dake Chen, Tongya Liu, Di Tian, Min He, Qi Li, and Jian Liu

Data sets

A Moored Array Observation Dataset for Air-Sea·Surface, Upper and Bottom Ocean in the Northern South China Sea during 2014–2015 (MASCS 1.0) Han Zhang, Dake Chen, Tongya Liu, Di Tian, Min He, Qi Li, and Jian Liu https://zenodo.org/records/12635331

Han Zhang, Dake Chen, Tongya Liu, Di Tian, Min He, Qi Li, and Jian Liu

Viewed

Total article views: 642 (including HTML, PDF, and XML)

HTML	PDF	XML	Total	BibTeX	EndNote
418	79	145	642	27	19

HTML: 418
PDF: 79
XML: 145
Total: 642
BibTeX: 27
EndNote: 19

Views and downloads (calculated since 15 Jul 2024)

Month	HTML	PDF	XML	Total
Jul 2024	139	31	9	179
Aug 2024	93	25	11	129
Sep 2024	97	16	30	143
Oct 2024	58	4	69	131
Nov 2024	31	3	26	60

Cumulative views and downloads (calculated since 15 Jul 2024)

Month	HTML	PDF	XML	Total
Jul 2024	139	31	9	179
Aug 2024	93	25	11	129
Sep 2024	97	16	30	143
Oct 2024	58	4	69	131
Nov 2024	31	3	26	60

Viewed (geographical distribution)

Total article views: 612 (including HTML, PDF, and XML) Thereof 612 with geography defined and 0 with unknown origin.

Country	#	Views	%

Latest update: 20 Nov 2024

Short summary

The manuscript provides a moored array dataset (MASCS 1.0) of the observation that consists of five buoys and four moorings in the northern South China Sea during 2014 to 2015. The moored array is influenced by atmospheric forcing such as tropical cyclones and monsoon, as well as oceanic tides and flows. The data reveals variations of air-sea interface and ocean itself, which are valuable for studies on air-sea interactions and ocean dynamics in the northern South China Sea.


Total:	0
HTML:	0
PDF:	0
XML:	0