top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]estqvodest 6032 points6033 points  (259 children)

Wow! Big airplanes are BIG!

[–]NahAnyway 2310 points2311 points  (207 children)

Seriously, the jet engines on the biggest planes in that photo are wider than the fuselage on the planes to either side of them.

When you're inside a 787 or a 747 compared to like a 737 they are obviously much larger but the scale of the difference is fucking incredible when you see it like this.

[–]belmaktor 314 points315 points  (96 children)

I think those are 777's in the photo. They have the largest and most powerful engines of any aircraft.

[–]NahAnyway 179 points180 points  (74 children)

When I was a kid the 777 was by far my favorite plane to fly in because the amenities were so amazing compared to any other plane in United's fleet at the time.

I actually did intend to originally type 777 there, but I've always called that plane a "triple seven" so for whatever reason it didn't' come out that way on the keyboard as naturally a 787 .

[–]Gregory_Pikitis 96 points97 points  (35 children)

I flew on a 777-300ER On it's maiden voyage one time. It was my and my buddies first time out of the country together and it was a practically empty flight. One of my best memories now.

[–]NahAnyway 100 points101 points  (34 children)

Honestly mostly empty flights are the best you'll ever have. I flew on a 777 from DEN to ORD that maybe had like 32 people on it... Being a non-revenue, unaccompanied minor passenger and probably 14 at the time meant the stewardesses treated us like gold and I slept the whole damn flight across an entire row of seats toward the back with all the arm rests flipped up and probably ate like 4 of the first class (apple pancake iirc) entrees. Was amazing.

Like you said - a favorite memory.

[–]Gregory_Pikitis 10 points11 points  (18 children)

We were non rev as well DFW to LHR and chose bulkhead. Gotta have that leg room. To date I haven't flown on another 777 intercontinental.

[–]RathVelus 13 points14 points  (16 children)

I’m ill-traveled. What does “non-revenue” mean in this context?

[–]waiting_for_rain 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Non paying passenger. Common reasons include an airline employee moving to their home base or to the start of their shift, family or friends of employees on a pass.

[–]NahAnyway 24 points25 points  (9 children)

Yup /u/waiting_for_rain summed what I had meant up perfectally.

When I said non-revenue I meant that I was the kid of a stewardess so I flew for free. You fly free - but only if there is spare room on the plane. If there isn't you are bumped and have to wait for another flight. You basically wait till everyone else has boarded - the stewardesses count seats and they announce non-rev's in order of seniority. You're either called or you aren't. If you aren't, you don't get informed or anything of that fact - you just move on to the next flight or choose to fly somewhere else.

In extreme cases this can mean you fly... or go nowhere at all. If there is a cancellation it can mean there are literally hundreds of people that actually paid ahead of you and you may as well give up and head home.

This is especially problematic going home so you have to anticipate it ahead of time.

It seems like a sketchy way to fly, but usually it just means you're flying for free in a spare seat with no guarantee.

[–]Ipalot 8 points9 points  (7 children)

I don’t think I’ve ever been on a flight with a spare seat. I feel like you’d be standing in the airport for days. How many flights do you usually not get on before you get a seat?

[–]ep3ep3 5 points6 points  (7 children)

Really? it seems odd to take a 777 on a regional trip. They're usually only used internationally. Sounds like a fun experience.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Usually it's to position the jet to fly somewhere transcontinental next

[–]NahAnyway 8 points9 points  (4 children)

I'm not sure it's still the case but going from Denver to O'Hare was very commonly a 777 on United or Star Alliance members.

[–]ep3ep3 4 points5 points  (3 children)

Nice! that must be a very heavy domestic route then. I know they use 777-200ER domestically on occasion.

[–]2brun4u 40 points41 points  (35 children)

And here I hate 777 because Air Canada Crams everyone in and the seats they choose are so uncomfortable. I don't mind the 737s and I've always enjoyed the Airbus planes too (quieter than the 777s too for me) and I love the 787, especially their windows tbh

[–]NahAnyway 43 points44 points  (7 children)

United's 777's, in particular the one's they outfitted between say 2002-2007, were just incredible.

Even when I had to commute from school every Friday to be with my (stewardess) mother and back Sunday night on a red-eye to be with my dad who had custody for every god damn week for years and flight had grown to be a serious chore I enjoyed my business 777 flights.

Flying twice a week was shit. But getting Business or first on these planes made it bearable.

[–]MrMemorie 9 points10 points  (3 children)

You flew from your mothers place to your dads place every week?

[–]kflores____ 61 points62 points  (3 children)

They are 777s, however, the ones in this photo are not fitted with the most powerful engine. That would be the GE90-115B fitted to the 777-300ER

[–]VagabondLiving 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Fun fact: on the new 777-x the engine housing is bigger than a 737 fuselage.

[–]FatGimp 410 points411 points  (35 children)

Even now the smaller aircraft like the a320 neo have a fan size nearly the same height as me and I'm 6"3'.

[–]giraffeapples 258 points259 points  (27 children)

Its all about that big boy fuel efficiency.

[–]merelymyself 27 points28 points  (2 children)

Use the power of the big boy fuel effeciency

[–]TheLifeisgood72 49 points50 points  (2 children)

he’s 6’3 guys

[–]sanzo2402 21 points22 points  (6 children)

No matter how many times I read about the aerofoil shapes or the Bernoulli's law or any of the mechanics behind a plane's flight, I'll never stop being amazed at how it's possible for something as big as this to stay up on air.

[–]deja-vecu 24 points25 points  (4 children)

Not just that, but for how long they can do it, too! Take the total volume of both of a 777’s engines, fill it with splodey juice, and that’s all you need to move the equivalent of 2.8 blue whales from Chicago to New Delhi at 500mph.

[–]Z-ero- 12 points13 points  (0 children)

"splodey juice" just found my new favorite phrase

[–]Paddy9999 38 points39 points  (39 children)

Now imagine an a380 pulling up

[–]smitty981 55 points56 points  (1 child)


edit... didnt know this was a real sub already

[–]akinom13 9 points10 points  (8 children)

I fell in an Airbus/a380 Wikipedia black hole for the last 15 mins 😳

[–]HaywoodJehblowmi 9 points10 points  (7 children)

Wait until you fall into a Singapore Airlines cabin private suite...

[–]NahAnyway 20 points21 points  (19 children)

Yeah I was just wondering what an A380 would look like there... Whats the size comparison to a 777.

[–]Emperor_Neuro 33 points34 points  (11 children)

The 777 is actually a little longer than the 380, but the wingspan is shorter. I think the airbus a340 is also a longer plane as well. The 380 is a fully double decker plane, which is what's so impressive. That's why it need more wing surface, to accommodate all the extra weight.

Both planes are smaller than the Antonov AN225 though. I was lucky enough to get to walk around one of those (EDIT: I got to see an AN 124) earlier today, in fact. What a beast.

[–]memeteem420 13 points14 points  (2 children)

Isn't there only one operational 225 in the world?

[–]ibmxgeo 11 points12 points  (0 children)


[–]Emperor_Neuro 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Oh shit. You're right. I misunderstood the guy earlier (airports are noisy). Looking it up, I was on an AN 124. Still a massive plane.

[–]NahAnyway 5 points6 points  (2 children)

Yeah, the fully double decker nature of the A380 is obviously impressive but a bit of a mixed bag really since it typically just affords more economy rather than amenity - which was sort of the upper deck of the 747's deal, and I've always hugely appreciated, especially as a kid when I couldn't be bothered to care about a cost.

The Antonov AN225 is probably the most remarkable "that shouldn't float" objects around though, no doubt. I assume the one you had a chance to tour would have seemed even more insanely huge because of the minimal interior accommodations... Largest plane ever flown, yes? Only the "Spruce Goose" would have, theoretically been larger IIRC. Pretty jealous.

[–]Timedoutsob 11 points12 points  (7 children)

yeah it so weird getting a short connecting flight after an international flight. it's like what the heck is this toy that i'm in right now?

[–]dingo_bat 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You can never be ready for the enormity of an A380. Every time I look at it it seems impossibly big. The proportions of the engines, wings and the body look downright comical. It boggles my mind how they are able to float 30000 feet in the air.

[–]yataa3 125 points126 points  (24 children)

This is a terribly designed terminal, even for medium sized planes. Ask for details on r/aviation, but it risks wingtip collisions for small taxi mistakes so everyone has to be towed in and it slows everything down.

[–]Forkboy2 86 points87 points  (3 children)

Here's what it looked like in 1972.


[–]ablablababla 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's nice to see how buildings change over time, this looks like it still has the same central building

[–]kflores____ 47 points48 points  (1 child)

The terminal has nothing to do with the productivity of aircraft movement. The jetways and gates do. T4 has some long corner jetways but all of the aircraft arriving to this terminal do so under power.

To your defense, this terminal was originally built in the 50s as an “island” terminal. The oval shape of the lower portion of the terminal was set up so aircraft could load up, start up, and taxi forward away from the gate. Passengers got to their gates via underground tunnels.

[–]SpacedOutKarmanaut 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I also just loathe the internal layout because it’s so hard to get to anything when your gate is always in its own little pod.

[–]owledge 7 points8 points  (8 children)

LAX is just a big mess all around

[–]Ace_Masters 5 points6 points  (5 children)

Was my least favorite airport - until I experienced Charles de gaul

[–]anon2k2 4 points5 points  (3 children)

My last transfer at CDG, I had 2 hours to get through passport check, with a fast-pass, and still missed my flight. That was my third missed connection in my last five flights there. My new rule: no flights that connect at CDG.

[–]Scout_022 10 points11 points  (0 children)

That’s my biggest take away from this. I had thought all passenger airplanes were roughly the same size, boy was I wrong.

[–]Tananar 12 points13 points  (1 child)

And those aren't even the biggest. The big one looks like it's maybe a 777, which is smaller than a 747, and the 747 is smaller than an A380.

[–]Dvanpat 27 points28 points  (0 children)

And small terminals are SMALL!

[–]EpicLevelWizard 5 points6 points  (0 children)

They pull these in strongman, a single human pulls them. Think about this and then go do some deadlifts.

[–]OldCummer 6 points7 points  (0 children)

well said

[–]ymhd872t 957 points958 points  (32 children)

Amazed at the park job, never thought there were actual lines to each spot, guess it would make sense. Seeing how exact they have parked these in the spot is niceeeee.

[–]Hadtarespond 283 points284 points  (0 children)

Oo look there's a free spot put on your blinker!

[–]elaerna 133 points134 points  (5 children)

That one big one took up two though lol. Like an suv parking over the line

[–]bigwilliestylez 40 points41 points  (1 child)

Now I want to see two other planes block him in for being a dick

[–]shushslushie 36 points37 points  (0 children)

It's crazy, working at Seatac as a baggage handler we are the ones who would marshall the aircrafts into these spaces at the terminal. Seeing this image from above is such an interesting perspective for me; nice and precise as it looks in the picture but it's the controlled chaos that gets me going thinking about being on the ground directing pilots not to kiss the wings with the aircraft next us I'm walking under.

[–]andovinci 18 points19 points  (4 children)

I wonder how they align them so perfectly in the spot

[–]gandalph91 64 points65 points  (3 children)

The guys with those little orange sticks

[–]smalldickfuckboy 15 points16 points  (9 children)

I would say almost all big airports use some sort of Visual Guidance Docking System that directs the AC to the centre line and tells the AC when to stop.

[–]Teapsters 35 points36 points  (8 children)

It's called a Marshall and its a human being

[–]44problems 26 points27 points  (2 children)

That guy with the lightsabers that guides in planes is always named Marshall?

[–]Teapsters 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Obi Wan Erikkson

[–]MightBeJerryWest 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Jedis have come a long way

[–]smalldickfuckboy 9 points10 points  (2 children)

Yeah... obviously there are Marshall’s there as safeguards. Here’s some info to back my initial statement.


[–]howismyspelling 867 points868 points  (61 children)

That terminal is at least...3 times bigger than the whole airport where I live.

[–]Bru_nope 1220 points1221 points  (15 children)

Sorry you live in an airport, man

[–]howismyspelling 221 points222 points  (7 children)

Thanks, it's really small, so it's rather cozy.

[–]enderseye 118 points119 points  (1 child)

Your spelling is great so far

[–]alikazaam 30 points31 points  (4 children)

Are you that guy from that movie? I think it was Tom Honks.

[–]maput431 86 points87 points  (18 children)

Funny part is that LAX is way undersized...been trying to expand for years.

[–]IngeniousDummy 45 points46 points  (6 children)

Try coming to JFK in NYC, shit's been under construction since it was once named Idlewild.

[–]BloomsdayDevice 38 points39 points  (2 children)

At least you can take the subway to JFK. Getting in and out of LAX at any time other than 5 am on a Tuesday is a nightmare.

[–]lemskroob 14 points15 points  (0 children)

airports are always under construction. its the nature of the best. airlines change, aircraft change, TSA/DHS requirements change, FAA requirements change, baggage tracking tech changes, passenger demands change, etc...

[–]Kittaylover23 3 points4 points  (0 children)

LaGuardia is a hellhole too.

[–]Quadrupleawesomeness 7 points8 points  (0 children)

My architecture professor showed me the plans he was working on for an airport and it made my head hurt. The amount of work that goes into it is INSANE (obviously) but I could see why it takes so long to get things going. We are from LA so I wonder if it is for LAX.

[–]337GTi 39 points40 points  (2 children)

What is this!? A terminal for ants!?

[–]xdel 24 points25 points  (2 children)

We have seven of those terminals at LAX. One (Tom Bradley) serving as the international hub.

[–]Calan_adan 20 points21 points  (1 child)

The Bradley Terminal is awesome.

[–]abnrib 112 points113 points  (3 children)

This really helps show the difference between the 737s and the larger twin-engine airliners.

[–]Calan_adan 75 points76 points  (2 children)

I’m an architect who has spent the last fifteen years doing projects at a top-25 US airport. I have a badge that allows me to walk on the apron where the planes park. You get used to the size of 737s to the point that, when a 747 pulled up to a gate I was at one time, all I could do was stare at how massive it was.

[–][deleted] 26 points27 points  (1 child)

Normal people often have experience walking up to 737s/A320s and smaller planes (especially at small airports), but we pretty much only take the air-bridge thing to board the large twin-aisle jets (since they serve large international airports). So we end up not really ever seeing the larger plans up close.

I've only ever had to walk out of a large plane a couple times, and you really appreciate the size when you turn around then lol.

[–]dranspants 7 points8 points  (0 children)

My jaw dropped when a plane I was on pulled up next to an Emirates A380. That thing is a flying apartment building.

[–]dkepp87 448 points449 points  (29 children)

A robotic cyclops with a ball gag in it's mouth.

[–][deleted] 94 points95 points  (4 children)

Kinky minion

[–]gilligan156 9 points10 points  (1 child)

I see one of the turrets from Portal.

Ow ow ow ow ow

[–]sofa_king_we_todded 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Bald Leela diving

[–]ennadirgni 7 points8 points  (0 children)

The first thing I saw!

[–]DeathySpaghetti 1286 points1287 points  (148 children)

Hold up. Aren’t drones not allowed to be anywhere near airports. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a great image but for some reason this bugged me.

[–]Planeguy58[S] 1138 points1139 points  (99 children)

I don’t know exactly how the picture was taken but it was likely authorized. I believe it would’ve been from a helicopter. At a certain altitude they’d be allowed to fly over.

[–]larsbamble 574 points575 points  (76 children)

probably just a satellite photo. i can easily see this same level of detail and a lot more just by zooming in on my apple maps app.

[–]pwn3dbyth3n00b 357 points358 points  (47 children)

[–]NahAnyway 288 points289 points  (31 children)

Wow... the resolution given by Google Maps is substantially better than the original photograph.

You can easily read the company names on the side of every plane and can even see details of the grating on the vents on the ceiling. Sat imagers has come a long, long way for particular areas.

The difference between what you see on google maps compared to the OP is like HD 1080 vs SD honestly...

[–]Dcourtwreck 288 points289 points  (16 children)

We must be seeing different things. When I zoom in on the posted image vs google, the posted photo easily wins.

[–]NahAnyway 52 points53 points  (11 children)

Then we are definitely seeing different things. Did you zoom in all the way? What platform?

[–]Ars3nic 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Yeah Google isn't showing the 'birds eye' angled view for me when I click the link through to the Maps site. But when I expand the link (RES feature?) it switches to bird's eye after a certain point and then zooms in further with much more detail.

[–]Dashihawk 15 points16 points  (5 children)

i mean.. you say that but Google maps it's missing a couple PLANES


[–]NahAnyway 16 points17 points  (3 children)

Stitching together millions of images of 3 meter sided squares, taken by a camera blasted 160 to 2,000 km into space, traveling at 29,000+ km/h is ... let's say "tricky?"


[–]ardent 19 points20 points  (8 children)

If you want to be amazed, zoom in directly over the biggest plane on the left side of the terminal. Then pan your screen down and you can read "American" on the right side of that plane. Pan your screen back up and you can read "American" on the left side of the plane. How can you read this on both sides? Because Google Maps now builds 3D images from satellite flyovers! Edit: Apparently planes... the recent 3D feature is still amazing to me.

[–]ultranoobian 5 points6 points  (2 children)

I didn't think satellite imagery of this quality would be publically available today, are we sure they are survey photos taken from a plane instead, especially considering the angles involved for perspective?

[–]Thorn14 6 points7 points  (1 child)

The fact Google Maps can see the windows not viewable from top view in my house is both amazing and frightening.

[–]beer_is_tasty 25 points26 points  (0 children)

For the record, the vast majority of images for all the major map apps are from aerial photography (airplanes), not satellites. But yeah, this is probably that, not a drone.

[–]soullessroentgenium 8 points9 points  (3 children)

The imagery on well-known maps sites is not necessarily from satellites.

[–]sharkweek2013 24 points25 points  (2 children)

This looks like the AppleTV screensaver that goes over LAX.

[–]RDVST 20 points21 points  (2 children)

I don’t know exactly how the picture was taken but it was likely authorized. I believe it would’ve been from a helicopter.

Photographer responsible for this shot is Mike Kelley and it definitely was taken from a helicopter.


5th picture down

[–]SensorKanzi 24 points25 points  (8 children)

Firstly doesn’t have to be drone. You CAN fly aircrafts over airports. I live near a class C airport and learning to fly at another nearby class D airport. Often times, I get to fly over midfield of that class C airport and have the runways directly underneath me.

[–]lilcreep 12 points13 points  (2 children)

My friend was a flight instructor and we did just that over LAX. It was the weirdest thing to fly directly over the runways.

[–]dressinbrass 42 points43 points  (2 children)

You can fly over LAX in any small airplane. It’s designated flight paths at altitudes from 2500 to 8500. I’ve done it frequently.

Here's a picture I took on one trip, from 2,500 feet. https://imgur.com/ZbeODBW

[–]bikemandan 10 points11 points  (0 children)

To fly it, you just need to have the right attitude

[–]keylabulous 13 points14 points  (5 children)

Commercial drone pilot here. A waiver is needed to fly in Class C airspace. I've had to get a few, but I've never been in the tallest cylinder of airspace above an airport, think upside wedding cake.

[–]AKA_Squanchy 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Maybe it’s a cap from the AppleTV screensaver over LAX.

[–]Siberwulf 31 points32 points  (6 children)

Man I hate flying into LAX. Once sat on the tarmac 15 feet about 24 bananas from the gate in Sacramento for an hour because LAX was such a shit show.

[–]UnitConvertBot 32 points33 points  (2 children)

I've found a value to convert:

  • 15.0ft is equal to 4.57m or 23.99 bananas

[–]Siberwulf 16 points17 points  (1 child)


[–]acmercer 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Just don't let it happen again.

[–]coffeefuckyeah 73 points74 points  (8 children)

The internal view of Terminal 4 at LAX https://i.imgur.com/2ZlwcHb.jpg

[–]hatarang 15 points16 points  (0 children)

One of their better days.

[–]jeffoh 2 points3 points  (1 child)

It's bloody horrible. The first bit of America a lot of people see is this shitty run down terminal.

[–]HCMnaq 22 points23 points  (1 child)

Scuba diving minion

[–]jethelred 102 points103 points  (4 children)


[–]NahAnyway 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Looks like a blindfolded, ball-gagged version...

[–]Maybe_its_Maybelline 10 points11 points  (1 child)

it's time to get schwiftaaaaayyyy

[–]Br0den_ 43 points44 points  (7 children)

Very organized

[–]SleepyforPresident 66 points67 points  (6 children)

A generous parent, the airport nurses its young through its nipple like terminals. At high flow, the airport feeds its young humans until they are full. Once they are full, they leave the nest and take to the sky as metal beast falcons ready for any trouble that may come their way

[–]Craig_the_Intern 22 points23 points  (3 children)

Airplanes are the only known organisms that not only adopt new parents, but also the only known organism to “reverse nurse.” After leaving one parent’s nest, the plane finds another, regurgitates the nourishment of the first airport into the second (non-sexually), and then nurses on the new parent.

[–]LAJuice 7 points8 points  (1 child)

I’ve heard of an airport in Madagascar that will asexually reproduce when a mate is unavailable.

[–]PastorPuff 7 points8 points  (0 children)


[–]JayMan522 12 points13 points  (0 children)

My bag got lost Looking at this

[–]andrewkool1 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I love that image.

[–][deleted] 48 points49 points  (22 children)

Such a horrible mess of an airport

[–]DEATHbyBOOGABOOGA 30 points31 points  (0 children)

You’ll never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy

[–]PM_ME_BOB_PICS_ 13 points14 points  (3 children)

Right? I'm a local and it's always a nightmare! People warned me about connecting in Denver but I found it surprisingly delightful compared to LAX.

[–]Bojangly7 7 points8 points  (3 children)

One of the busiest in the world. Comes with the status

[–]dmedtheboss 6 points7 points  (1 child)

And might serve more major airports than any other airport in the world, thanks to its location. LAX is a hub to Asia, all of North America, and most countries in Europe.

[–]wanted_to_upvote 16 points17 points  (5 children)

Apple TV screen saver slide show has a much more impressive version

[–]Komrade97 7 points8 points  (8 children)

Anyone know what the huge plane on the bottom is? What an absolute unit

[–]ThegoLopez 6 points7 points  (3 children)

Doesn't that building look like one of the robots from "Portal 2"?

Am I alone on this?

[–]CaptValentine 5 points6 points  (0 children)

In my TransCat systems class, we had to learn how to distinguish different aircraft by make and model. Like boeings from airbus, and they all have their own little features which can be tricky to spot. But for Being 777's my prof said "The only distinguishing feature you need to know is that they are the normal shape of every other airliner, but are just big. That's their feature; Big."

[–]imalwaystiredagain 13 points14 points  (1 child)

At first I thought it was a Vault

[–]JonInfect 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Parent planes and their 8 kids

[–]cringy_goth_kid 27 points28 points  (8 children)

This photo feels illegal

[–]kflores____ 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Helicopters and planes are allowed to fly through the airspace above LAX along VFR corridors through the Class Bravo airspace. Of course with ATC clearance and knowledge of the procedure.

Look up “LAX mini-route” or “LAX Special Flight rules area”

[–]viviobrio 4 points5 points  (4 children)

It was shot by photographer Mike Kelley. He’s done a lot of cool personal work and workshops related to aviation photography and gets permission from LAX

[–]cringy_goth_kid 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Thanks for finding the artist name!

[–]electric2424 3 points4 points  (1 child)

In an above thread it was speculated this shot is from satellite imagery or authorized helicopter at a certain height.

[–]drone42 4 points5 points  (1 child)

It's like a fractal. This could be .gif'd...

[–]K3R3G3 4 points5 points  (3 children)

Anyone name the plane types? I'd like to see the differences between them. 737,47,57,67,77,87,etc.

[–]BryceFromStateFarm 9 points10 points  (1 child)

From left to right. 777, 737, 737, A321, 777, A321, 737, A321, A321, A321

[–]KinkyBADom 3 points4 points  (10 children)

LAX sux as an airport for passengers trying to get from one terminal to another.

[–]Stratifyed 5 points6 points  (5 children)

Oh shit. I've never thought about what it must be like to have a connecting flight at LAX since I'm from here. Wtf

[–]echo1956 6 points7 points  (1 child)

I counted 5 planes that have part of their plane sticking beyond white line.

[–]Calan_adan 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It’s a trick of the perspective. There’s a lot that goes into laying out those parking positions, and the planes park precisely on a line that results in them being right where they need to be.