Aviation Religions

What about those that see (VFR) as opposed to those who have seen the light (IR rated)…..

Cobalt deep in the Dead Sea scrolls there is evidence of heated disputes between the tail draggers and nose dragger tribes. In those distant times the tail draggers were sometimes assisted by those who subscribed to bi-planeism, their priests took it to a higher level and worshipped tri-planeism, but eventually there was a schism when a significant portion of taildraggers converted to monoplaneism.

Amongst the aerobatic community the debate between bi-planeism and mono continues unabated.

When the jet arrived a new scientology emerged ‘if it’s not Boeing I ain’t going’.

Turbo vs. Non-Turbo

Some of the biggest fault lines run along these:

• Powered flyers vs. those preferring permanent engine failure (i.e. gliders)
• Ultralight-headed pilots vs. those who prefer being able to carry fuel and a passenger legally

On a serious note, these divisions are in my opinion one of the worst factors for general aviation as a whole. If we were able to speak with one voice more often, we couldn’t be divided-and-conquered, be it in airfield politics, noise discussions or airspace debates.

• Electristians vs. Fossilists ?

Helico-centrics ?

What about Glassiulonists and the believers of the 6?

And I’d like to second @Rwy20, because the reason why people are flying is often the same, the way they do it differently depends on a lot of secondary factors.

High Wingists vs Low Wingists?

Bernoulli Suckers vs Newton Pushers?
Kickers vs The Wing-Down People?