Abstract/intro: There is not an 'optimal temperature'. But need to avoid thermal runaway.

2) Make very clear at the start of the paper, in one or two sentences, that the goal is to provide direct measurement of thermal properties. These are now available. Also make it very clear that this is for unidirectional fiber composites.

Line 62-63 The point here could be argued without specifics - as written now it seems that this mostly applies to IT, but the ultimate problem is generic to IT/OT. Try to keep motivation general.

Use a figure our a CAD 3D drawing of a Dee  to explain why it is important to measure the CF thermal properties. The issue that we have with the motivation is that it does not make it clear that the in-plane conductivity is important. Figure 1 gives the impression that only the through plane conductivity matters.

Is figure 2 really needed. This seems to really belong in a paper that address the design of the thermal system - not a paper that aims at measure the properties of the CF thermal properties. This would allow removing a lot of technical detailes about the FEA in the introduction.

Section 2.1 and section 2.2 seems to be in the wrong order.  Add formula to show how you calculate conductivities for a composite with different fiber directions (Anders - not actually sure how important this is. It is really a basic formula and I don't think it addressed the harder problems about the measurements in different directions.)

Thermal runaway needs to be introduced together with technical terms in Section 2.2.

It would be very helpful to have a sketch for each of the three sample types (k_xx, k_yy, k_zz) showing the fibre direction and coordinate system in each sample type. The sample dimensions should be shown as well, including which dimension is varied from one sample to the next and in which range that variation is. For the k_xx and k_yy sample types the thermal contact surface area location and dimensions should be shown. How were the sample contact surfaces prepared? (cut, polished etc.)

For Table 1 - can you explain the assumptions (inputs) used to calculate the thermal conductivities? For the curing at higher pressure is should not only be the z direction that is affected? At least also y?

Section 3.1 - Why is heat exchange between between the flux meter and air not included in the study?

Section 3.2 - Should make it more clear how the FEA is tied to the analysis

Section 3.4 - You assume a linear dependence in the temperature with position. With heat exchange with air (and radiation) how good is this approximation?

Section 5.2 - Suddenly has these new materials that have not been discussed earlier. Should be better motivated (or dropped).

The measuremnent of k_yy differs most signifciantly from the prediction, by as much as a factor of 10. But it is also the hardest measurement with the largerst (relative) error. We think these careats whould be made clear.

In the conclusion/discussion there should be some discussion about the need to measure properties of lay-ups with plys in the directions as planned by the CMS tracker to compare to these measurements with unidirectional fibers.