Dear Dr. Korovinskiy,

thank you for a detailed response to the referee comments. After reviewing your answers and revisions, I am happy to accept the revised version your manuscript (submitted together with your answers to the reviewers) for publication in Annales Geophysicae.

Before proceeding with the final article acceptance, please consider correcting the following:

p3, line 14--> "...while in the general case..."
p4, line 5 ---> "...for a bent..."

Also, please clarify that in page 4, line 24, the x~340L is correct. Values of x quoted elsewhere in the manuscript (e.g Figures 1-9) are typically much smaller than 100L.

Finally, while an expression of L to which results are normalised is given in eq. 17 (page 8), a similar one (but maybe with slightly different absolute value) is given in Line 8 of page 9. Can you verify that the normalisation of L is the same in both cases and if normalised x values quoted before and after equation 17 can be compared?