Comments on abstract, title, references

This paper presented some experimental results for the slamming water impact of a flexible aluminium wedge. The paper aimed to experimentally investigate the dynamic structural response of the bottom plate of a wedge and compare it against the computational methods. The hydrodynamic pressure and the out-of-plane deflection reported clearly. They measured the out-of-plane deflection using stereoscopic digital image correlation. The title of the paper is informative and relevant. Previous studies have been correctly cited, but certain new and important studies have not been reviewed. In addition, I recommend adding some references about the stereoscopic digital image correlation method.

Comments on introduction/background

The introduction is well written. The authors reviewed previous studies about water entry problems both in the numerical and experimental approaches.

As the paper is presented an experimental method in slamming for elastic bodies, therefore it would be better to refer to some hydroelastic studies that have done recently.

The research question is a bit ambiguous and the authors should modify that part of the introduction. In the last paragraph of the introduction, they mentioned that a one-way coupling method is used but it would be better to introduce this method somewhere or refer it to the previous studies and what is the difference between one-way and two-way coupling methods.

Comments on methodology

The methodology section is written well. They explained computational and experimental methods in two subsections. There are a few sentences that need clarification.

Please explain how to non-dimensionalized the time step.

The non-constant velocity and nearly constant entry velocity need to be clarified.

As there is some vibration on the top of the wedge body, then it is recommended to install the accelerometer on the top of the keel.

Please present the sampling rate of all devices you used in the experiment.

They mentioned that a frame rate of 1000 fps was used for stereoscopic digital image correlation. It needs to present more information about this method and please demonstrate if this frame rate is adequate for capturing all processes.

Comments on data and results

The rigid body motion, hydrodynamic pressure, and structural response are presented in the results section. The experimental data presented and compared against the computational method in an appropriate way. However, some modifications are needed to improve the quality of the results section.

1. Please show the results in figures 7, 8, and 9 in a better way to see the difference between the experimental and computational method.

2. Authors used nondimensionalization to analyse the results but the nondimensionalization equation is ambiguous, so please explain it more and show it in an appropriate way.

3. What is the difference between t * and time * on page 12?

4. I would recommend using dimension for time and bottom deflection to analyse the results.

Comments on discussion and conclusions

In the chosen paper, the results section include discussion therefore the conclusions is the final section of the paper. The conclusions answered the aims of the study and stated some important outcomes of the experiment. They have also suggested future research on this topic which is useful.