A Clinician's discrimination between radiation therapy treatment plans is traditionally a subjective process, based on experience and existing protocols. A more objective and quantitative approach to distinguish between treatment plans is to use radiobiological or dosimetric objective functions, based on radiobiological or dosimetric models. The efficacy of models is not well understood, nor is the correlation of the rank of plans resulting from the use of models compared to the traditional subjective approach. One such radiobiological model is the Normal Tissue Complication Probability (NTCP). Dosimetric models or indicators are more accepted in clinical practice. In this study, three radiobiological models, Lyman NTCP, critical volume NTCP and relative seriality NTCP, and three dosimetric models, Mean Lung Dose (MLD) and the Lung volumes irradiated at 10Gy (V10) and 20Gy (V20), were used to rank a series of treatment plans using, harm to normal (Lung) tissue as the objective criterion. None of the models considered in this study showed consistent correlation with the Radiation Oncologists plan ranking. If radiobiological or dosimetric models are to be used in objective functions for lung treatments, based on this study it is recommended that the Lyman NTCP model be used because it will provide most consistency with traditional clinician ranking.