The Bureya Landslide Recent Evolution According to Spaceborne SAR Interferometry Data
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper studies the Bureya Landslide, and more specifically it presents recent evolution according to recent SAR data. The paper is an interesting one and is generally well-written. It can be improved if some figures are better edited: Titles must include information (e.g., in Figure 4 what are 1, 2, 3; in Figure 5 what are “landslide”, “forest”, “open area”; in Fig. 15 what are 1, 2,3, 4). Also axes in figures must always have titles indicating what is plotted. Furthermore, the manner that water table changes affect slope stability must be described: the authors are advised to study and refer in the text the papers given below. Also, the relationships between changes in precipitation level with measured ground movement must be better illustrated. Finally, possibly soil type of landslide and depth of the slip surface must be described, as found in the literature.
REFERENCES
B Di, CA Stamatopoulos, AC Stamatopoulos, E Liu, L Balla. 2021, Proposal, application and partial validation of a simplified expression evaluating the stability of sandy slopes under rainfall conditions. Geomorphology 395, 107966
Take, W.A., Bolton, M.D., Wong, P.C.P., Yeung, F.J. , 2004. Evaluation of landslide triggering mechanisms in model fill slopes. Landslides 1(3), 173–184.
Lambe T.W. and Whitman R., 1969. Soil Mechanics, MIT, Wiley, New York. (CHAPTER on soil stability with flow)
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
General Comments:
This paper presents the results of interferometric processing and analysis of ALOS-1/2 and Sentinel-1 SAR data collected in the Bureya riverbank landslide area from 2006-2018. By combining information on landslide deformation and meteorological and digital elevation models, it is demonstrated that the Bureya landslide evolved within the framework of a depression formed by residual landslides. The seasonal fluctuation of water level induced the landslide, and subsequently the landslide deformation accelerated due to the increase of precipitation until the disaster occurred. This paper presents a method for depicting landslide evolution with poor coherence and few available SAR interferometric pairs, which provides a reference for similar studies. The manuscript is logically structured and well written. But the innovation must be highlighted.
Specific Comments:
1. “The paper” can be replaced by “the study”, as it is not accepted currently.
2. Figure 5 plots the coherence time series for landslide, forest and open area, respectively. It is better to indicate the areas to calculate the coherence in Figs. 4 or 6.
3. Please clarify the procedure to calculate the deformation time series in 12 days in Figure 7 and 10. How do you process the vertically stratified component of the atmospheric error described in Section 4 in the absence of sufficient known stability points?
4. What’s the accuracy of InSAR deformation results? As the landslide displacements in winter shown in Figure 7, some of them are less than 1 cm. Besides, please indicate the location of the points to show the deformation in Figure 7 and 10.
5. As shown in Figure 11, the DEM has a great change before and after the occurrence of the landslide, please indicate the location of profile. Besides, is the DEM error considered when processing the ALOS data after the occurrence of the landslide?
6. Please indicate the fragments of Figure 13 in Figure 12. The depression at the top of the landslide can be seen in the SRTM DEM depicted in Figure 13, but not in the profile to the SRTM DEM in Figure 11.
7. As shown in Figure 14, the annual and monthly precipitation is not fine to analyze the correlation with surface deformation, and the quantitative analysis is highly recommended.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear Authors,
I have added my comments to the attached pdf file
With best regards
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is acceptable in its present form
