the figures in Appendix \[sec:appendixA\]). This is probably due to the much larger opacity of this line with respect to the other chromospheric signatures.

Most of the flaring pixels display a behavior similar to that shown in Figs. \[fig:spectraA\] and Fig. \[fig:spectraB\], with spectral profiles very asymmetrical during their early activation, due to the presence of the satellite component, and a clear continuum enhancement from the pre-flare value, best observed in the Fe [ii]{} window. As an example, in Appendix \[sec:appendixA\] we show corresponding Figures for two additional pixels (y $\sim$ 117, and y$\sim$ 123  along the slit); these same pixels are identified with the blue diamonds in Fig. \[fig:ltspec\].

To characterize the dynamics of the condensation, we have thus fitted the profiles of each flaring pixel with a pair of Gaussian profiles. As the shifted component is so prominent, a Gaussian fit should provide a better estimate of the redshift over the traditional bisector method that we employed in Paper I, which we find can slightly underestimate the maximum shift (in Appendix \[sec:appendixC\] we make a side by side comparison of both techniques.) The weak spectral lines such as Fe [ii]{} and Fe [i]{} are most likely optically thin 