What I don't get is this... we've all seen how the GFS model has 'backtracked' quite a lot in terms of the progression of this LP to our SW, and it was the only one which was sticking it waaay more North than the others. Agree right? Well, doesn't that say that there's something wrong with that modelling system then? Does it not also suggest then that, until it's proved itself again, then ALL of its outputs should be the one given less attention? Seems a bit odd that the GFS can be proven to be way off course, yet people still get excited about the very next model it chucks out? What's to say that that model run isn't going to be miles off as well? Personally I think I'm learning that GFS is a bit of a mickey mouse model - dreamers paradise but shouldn't really be taken seriously. ECM seems to be more of a solid looking thing, and UKMET is the business. Never bother thinking of the weather beyond 5 days because you might aswell just roll a dice (which is what the GFS models seem to do at that sorta range) just my tuppence anyway.