Dear authors
Thank-you for your revised manuscript with considered responses to the referees’ comments. I am now asking for “Technical Corrections” (as in the Comments below) after which you should upload your ”final” manuscript for publication. [I do not need to see it again but you should be aware that all comments made during the review process will be available to readers accessing the published version.] There will be copy-editing for use of English etc. and you should check that this preserves your intended meaning.
Thank-you for publishing in Ocean Science
Yours sincerely
John Huthnance (editor)

Comments
The referees were concerned about clear aims/objectives and how this study is an advance on previous work. I think you have this in the Introduction, paragraph lines 114-125. However, that lies between paragraphs about the context and is therefore a little “hidden”; it might better begin that paragraph with something like “Our objectives in this study are to decompose . .”
Lines 154, 156, also section 3.4, I would write “advance in 1935–1990” or “advance during 1935–1990” etc. but I think the meaning is clear enough to leave to the copy-editing.
Line 202. “almost importantly” is curious. Maybe “most importantly”?
Line 262. “the one” but there are many cells “closer to or more remote from the coast”. Do you mean “the adjacent cell”? Also line 263 maybe “more remote" –> “further”.
Line 327. Remove second “,”?
Section 2.5. In response to Referee 2 you say “. . sediment is assumed to be non-cohesive (and we have made this clear).” but I missed explicit statement “non-cohesive” in 2.5. You might insert this after “sand” (line 320).
Lines 382, 383. I don’t like “level”. Maybe simply omit “the level of” (line 382) and then (line 383) “. . 300,000±200,000 m3yr–1 around a headland near Mersrags. This amount of transport is also characteristic . .”
Line 396 (in figure 7 caption). I don’t understand “3-yr running mean of the average transport 1990–2022”. Do you mean a 3-point running spatial mean?
Line 430. Second “and the net transport” is redundant.
Line 488. Remove “,” after “changes” and after “(Fig. 4)”
Line 522. “and” –> “,”?
Lines 658-659. Add “(. . .)” around citation.
Line 689 (figure 11 caption). Remove “(“ before “–2160”.
End of 4.2. Changing “role” or simply changing northerly winds?
Referee 3 had a comment “A separate discussion section is recommended. In this section, the acceptability of generalized data as model input should be discussed in particular.” You responded to the first sentence but not the second. I think it is now difficult to find out what the referee was referring to, but you could perhaps add some (more) discussion about possible uncertainties related to model input.
“Code and data availability”. Please refer to the OS Web site https://www.ocean-science.net/policies/data_policy.html . There is a paragraph at the end headed “Other underlying material” which is relevant and which you are encouraged to follow.