The manuscript continues the earlier work of authors Suni et al 2021 on understanding the source of magnetosheath jets in 2D simulations. The paper makes a very good step forward in our understanding of jet formation but needs some major improvements before being published. 

 

MAJOR:

- paper often refers that the results support the model by Karlsson et al 2015, but that paper states "An unambiguous answer to the question of how magnetosheath jets and plasmoids are formed is not available, and it is outside the scope of this paper to provide it." It would be very helpful to be more specific on what exactly in Karlsson et al 2015 paper the current study supports. It should be very clear what jet formation model the current study supports and clearly show evidence for that.

- It seems that the current manuscript is updating on the earlier results and shows that the previous division of jets in FCS and non-FCS type of jets is physically not appropriate. Just to remind that Suni et al 2021 was concluding that FCS and non-FCS jets have different sources, while this manuscript shows that it is not true. Therefore, it is unclear why the manuscript wants to distinguish between FCS and antisunward jets if their properties are similar. The conclusion section is written in a way that the separation between FCS and antisunward jets is not mentioned, and it would be appropriate to rewrite the whole paper also in the same way. FCS separation can be mentioned in the introduction or discussion in terms of putting in perspective the current manuscript to the earlier work but it is not appropriate from the point of view of discussing the main results of the paper. If authors want to keep FCS notations, then it has to be defined in a way that it includes antisunward jets.

- As a follow-up on the previous point, the abstract is too long.

- The methodology part requires improvements. 

- What is the spacecraft frame, and how it distinguishes from other frames?

- What exactly is spacecraft timing done - does one times pressure increase, pressure maximum, or just correlates pressure time series? There is no example showing how well the timed series align and how good is the plane wave assumption. In simulations no nice planar wave structures are seen.

- There is no discussion or explanation of what is the physical meaning of estimating vsc and vtr, and what are the expected differences.

- Recent studies, such as Raptis et al 2022, show that simply looking on moments is not enough, it can be too simplified and misleading picture in understanding jets as plasma can contain different populations in the same location. Vlasov simulations have the great advantage of having the full distribution function and allowing to resolve the different populations in distribution functions. At least for the case studies it would be important to include the distribution functions of jets, to support the usage of moments. 

 

MINOR:

l.13 propagate > propagating

 

l.156 It is confusing to have VSC as a notation for virtual s/c as later one uses also v_sc for the velocity of the dynamic pressure pulse.

 

Figure 5: red, orange, and pink are too close colors to be distinguishable. Valid also in other figures.