[Poohbah]

First of all, Speicher was apparently head-down, getting ready to shoot a HARM, when his plane was hit. Second, the culprit here wasn't a SAM site, it was a MiG-25 shooting an AA-6 Acrid--apparently there was poor coordination between Navy squadrons and Air Force AWACS planes for the first few days of the war, and that allowed an Iraqi plane to get in close.

If he didn't take a head-on missile shot as reported by his squadron mates, then just what DID happen?

[Slam]

If you would read you would find out that statement to be false....Scott..?

[Arioch7]

Yes, but the way it was reported when it happened was that he was hit by a SAM site.

Here is a quote from Cdr. Stumpf's article..."The likelihood of his survival from the shoot down is related to how he was shot down. Indeed, the circumstances of the shoot down are the first of many controversial issues that have surrounded the Speicher story from the very beginning. Initially the government's position was that he had been downed by a surface-to-air missile. Granted, many SAMs were launched in the general vicinity during the time of the mission. But in the exact area where Speicher was hit, U.S. intelligence was reporting no missile batteries, particularly of the type that would have reached up to Speicher's altitude near 30,000 feet. Then why would the government choose to report it as a SAM kill?"

Like I said, it might be good to question everything but what if it is true?