We sincerely thank the reviewer for this helpful comment. In response, we have revised the manuscript to provide a more conservative and realistic interpretation of the spatial coverage achievable by mobile stations. More specifically, we replaced the earlier optimistic estimate with a lower scenario-based value and clarified that the reported coverage should be understood as an analytical estimate under simplified assumptions. We also added discussion of route repetition, inaccessible streets, temporary interruptions, and temporal bias as important operational constraints affecting real deployment performance. This change can be found in Section 4.1.2 (Spatial Coverage Analysis) and in the Discussion/Limitations sections.

We appreciate the reviewer's valuable feedback on this point. Based on their input, we have updated the manuscript to offer a more cautious and practical assessment of the spatial coverage that mobile stations can realistically achieve. We replaced our previous optimistic projections with more conservative scenario-based estimates and made it clear that our coverage figures represent analytical calculations based on simplified conditions. Additionally, we incorporated discussion about practical challenges that impact actual deployment effectiveness, including the need to repeat routes, streets that cannot be accessed, temporary service disruptions, and temporal sampling limitations. These revisions appear in Section 4.1.2 (Spatial Coverage Analysis) as well as in the Discussion and Limitations sections.