Mike, are we pretty sure that all the latest data will be ingested in time, so to show up in the 0Z runs this evening?

There is no question that the Euro and GFS Global models perhaps provide the most accurate forecasts. I perhaps find that the GFS "sniffs out" potenial development faster than the more conservative Euro does. That said, once latched on I would perhaps test to slightly favor the Euro model. As amazing as the GFS has been in consistantly forecasting development and general motion....it AND every other model that I can think of INCORRECTLY depicted Irene to go south of Puerto Rico and either direclly over Hispanola and Eastern Cuba, or others even farther south. Ultimately, each of the various models out perform the others given certain circumstance and conditions relating to so many factors ( lower latitudes vs. higher latitudes, size & strength of the system, or their ability to better mesh forecasted motion and development verses interaction with TUTT's, Cut-Off Low's, Troughs, Ridges, etc. ). Even the LBAR has a purpose ( though if my life depended on it, I could not tell you what that might be

I think those who might indicate that one or two models clearly present "the solution", and too disregard any other reasoning, would not only imply a degree of ignorance but furthermore understates the very difficult job NHC forecasters really have ( well beyond any political/psychological media releases to keep the masses from panicking ). The key with the many models, are to have the knowledge to know their strengths and weaknesses, and to make the human decision how much weight to apply to them based upon each unique situation.