Return from the PRL paper- rejection!

There's no difficulties to hear such a bad news of the rejection of our submitted PRL paper. After all, there're still many things to learn in this problem. I would like to make modifications and intensifications of major points emphasising by the Referee A. Here is his report:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Report of Referee A -- LV8975/Chang
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> This letter proposes a new dynamic model for predicting the motion of vortices over topography. This is an important problem and a successful dynamic model would be a significant new result.
>
The model proposed by the authors suffers from the significant flaw that it contains two free parameters, kappa and theta. Having free parameters in a model such as this is not necessarily fatal, but the authors have presented no serious studies of how these parameters should vary for flows with different vortices and different topographies. If, for a range of vortices and topographies, the dynamic model matched the shallow water model with no change in the parameters, then the dynamic model would indeed be a significant new model. If, however, the
parameters would need to be retuned for each new situation, the dynamic model would be much less useful.

Because of this lack of study of the role of the free parameters, I recommend this paper not be published in Physical Review Letters.

As mentioned by Prof. Chang, this Referee points out a necessary direction of further modifications of my paper. That is to make a proper regime diagram showing that whether the dynamic model is valid or not for various conditions of vortices and topographies. I would like to check this by the following strategies.

1. For a 3-1 hill, at least RUN three cases for north to south for a standard vortex passing over topographies with different heights (from 500m to 3500m).
   This test would be illustrated the effect of topography height to the induced circulation effect \theta (with a fixed \kappa).
2. For a 3-1 hill, fix the vortex location, RUN several cases by changing the strength of the vortices (\zeta_c) with same radius or by changing the radius of vortices with the same vorticity.
   This test focuses on the effect of vortex structures to the proportional constant \kappa.

On the other hand, the study of track maps is still active. I would like to construct the regime diagram of the track diverging index with the coordinates of the vortex incoming angle (or the angle of attack of vortices) and the topography orienting angle. This would be a tedious process to key in those values and see them as a contour plot.