As I have stated before in my post it really does need every positive voice expressed and NO 60 / 40 against is not a positive however you look at it. It’s shocking as you don’t have to be local to express a comment. The lack of ‘address’ mentioned above is worrying - it will be taken apart by organisations against it. If you work there or have an interest in the airport it’s fair to say optimism is perhaps clouding your view of the impact of a (albeit small) orange fleet based here. FACT. This will create a huge uplift in pollution noise and air. This should have been tackled full on in the application. My considerable experience in working within an LA and Planning tells me either they are playing a long game or they cut corners in the application (did it on the cheap) - BUT... I would not give up hope as the Govt we have now have clear form at lying down in front of bulldozers to stop airport expansion and passing full scale expansion next day. If application falls then the appeal is where the real opportunity stands, which makes their lack of address now even more strange. For this application and most definitely if it does go to appeal then the comments and information provided in the opportunity to comment is critical. Make a positive comment NOW if you haven’t. Mention travelling and local economy and balance of capacity. Whatever path your comment takes MAKE ONE. Every organisation against will be sending out mail shots advising comment content. Volume really matters. My gut feeling is rejected at planning (and only if the consultant being used has their cards in line) success on appeal as Govt Will need to show some positivity. But climate change isn’t going away - 10 years ago was the time for this application. Complete failure has left SOU where it is.