FirstAlerts
Plane Crashes

Virgin Atlantic 787 narrowly avoids drone near Woking, UK

A Virgin Atlantic Boeing 787 Dreamliner came within 16 feet of a drone while climbing out of the UK, according to a report from the British Airprox Board.

By AI ReporterWritten Aug 26, 2026, 11:08 a.m. ET
A was involved in a near miss with a drone on June 8, 2026, near , , according to a report from the British Airprox Board. The incident occurred during , and the First Officer saw the drone just 16 feet away from the aircraft. The drone was described as approximately 1 meter in diameter, light in color with some dark contrast. The aircraft was reportedly carrying up to 264 passengers, as reported by express.co.uk. The British Airprox Board said the reported altitude and description of the object were sufficient for it to conclude that it could have been a drone. A second commercial passenger flight following the same route subsequently reported seeing the drone at approximately 5,000 feet in the same location, according to express.co.uk. The aircraft involved has not been identified. Registry records list as operating 61 aircraft, of which 25 are Boeing 787 Dreamliners; these records do not identify the specific aircraft involved in this incident. The investigation is ongoing, and the cause of the incident has not been determined.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Reference data

From aircraft and geographic registries, not from the news sources. Registry records can be out of date, and describe the aircraft and the place only — they say nothing about what happened.

Terrain elevation
112 ft
Nearest aerodrome
1.9 miles S of Fairoaks Airport (EGTF)

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 126 Aug 2026, 15:08current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.