Comments for IN-VENTO2026 conference

Comment on Laboratory Experiments on the Low-Level Flow Environment for Tornadogenesis in a Supercell by ALEKSANDER PISTOL

ALEKSANDER PISTOL — Thu, 16 Apr 2026 15:42:13 +0000

The abstract shows a novel study of tornadogenesis through physical experiments in a purpose-designed wind tunnel. Whilst promising, there are several shortcomings that should be improved in the abstract (no re-review required):
1. The English of the paper could be improved, as currently the abstract appears a bit chaotic. Furthermore, there are several spelling mistakes (“Coler”, “dose”).
2. The schematic in Fig. 1 should be more clear, it is difficult to discern what is going on as the figure is a bit cluttered at the moment.
3. What is the length scale of the simulated mesocyclone? What are the velocity magnitudes that appear and how do they correspond/scale to nature?
4. There is a lot happening in Fig. 3 and it takes quite some time to read it. I suggest that these results are reported in a significantly different way during the presentation, as in the current form they would be very difficult for the audience to comprehend with the limited time available during a presentation.
5. More details on the cameras and their frequency would be helpful. Did the Authors consider using a PIV technique to obtain more quantitative results of the flow field?

Comment on Large eddy simulations of buoyancy-driven downburst winds by ALEKSANDER PISTOL

ALEKSANDER PISTOL — Thu, 16 Apr 2026 15:20:48 +0000

The abstract describes numerical simulation performed as a digital twin for wind tunnel tests modelling a downburst, with the addition of gravity current to the traditional impinging jet. The study has a potential of influencing the state-of-the-art modelling of downbursts. Aside from the comparison with wind tunnel tests, it would be interesting to see how the simulated velocities compare to a downbursts with similar parameters modelled without the gravity current to assess what we are missing if not taking the thermal effects into account. Also, I am curious on how the temperatures within the wind tunnel facility were measured and maintained at the precise levels reported in the abstract (down to 0.1 degree), which perhaps is a question to the physical experiments itself.
A minor correction in the abstract:
Section 2, last line – the citations of Canepa et al. are missing the opening bracket.