William Tell ( aerial gunnery competition ) William Tell is a biennial aerial gunnery competition with fighter aircraft held by the United States Air Force in every even - numbered year . In the competition , teams representing the various major commands of the USAF compete in live - fire exercises , using towed banner targets for gun engagements , and obsolete fighters converted into unmanned target drones ( currently QF - 4 Phantoms ) for air - to - air missile engagements . The William Tell competition in 1972 was held at Tyndall AFB in Florida . There were twelve teams competing in total : three F - 101 Voodoo teams , three F - 102 Delta Dagger teams , and six F - 106 Delta Dart teams . 1972 was also when the first " Top Gun " award was won . It was won by a Canadian team from the first French - Canadian fighter squadron , the 425 All Weather Fighter Squadron " Les Alouettes " . The recipients were Capt . Lowell Butters ( Pilot ) and Capt . Douglas Danko ( Navigator ) . They were flying the CF - 101B Voodoo . Air University Review , May – June 1971 William Tell 1970 Lieutenant Colonel Joseph L . Phinney According to legend , a medieval Austrian governor of Switzerland became enraged when a Swiss citizen refused to comply with his order to perform a trivial act of obeisance . Knowing of the subject ’ s prowess as a bowman , the governor offered him the alternative of complying with the order or shooting an apple off his son ’ s head . The archer chose to shoot the apple , and succeeded . Through the years the name of William Tell has become synonymous with skilled marksmanship in defense of freedom . Thus today ’ s air defense units can be considered contemporary extensions of the William Tell tradition . In the accomplishment of their mission and responsibilities , air defense units must exemplify the dedication , accuracy , and confidence that the legendary William Tell displayed in earlier times . Weapon systems and personnel must be honed to perform at the peak of efficiency during periods of stress . The best measure of this capability is a competitive environment . To these ends , the Fighter Interceptor Weapons Meet was resumed at Tyndall AFB , Florida , in October 1970 after an interruption of five years . William Tell Fighter Interceptor Weapons Meets began in the early fifties and were conducted on a biannual basis through 1965 . The competitions were suspended after the 1965 meet because of the increasing requirements of the Vietnam conflict . In November 1968 , however , Aerospace Defense Command ( ADC ) staffers began preliminary planning for a world - wide interceptor weapons meet to be conducted in October 1971 . The event was to involve air defense forces from USAFE and PACAF as well as those of the North American continent . But operational and financial considerations caused this plan for a worldwide meet to be abandoned in late 1969 in favor of a low - cost , in - house competition for representatives of ADC , Air National Guard , and Canadian Armed Forces in 1970 . Three categories of interceptors competed in William Tell ‘ 70 . F - 101 , F - 102 , and F - 106 . Four awards were presented in each category : one to the best aircrew / maintenance team , another to the best weapons controller team , a third to the best weapons load team , and the fourth to the team amassing the highest point total in each category . No overall winner was selected from the nine participating teams . The Canadian Armed Forces were invited to participate and were represented by the 409th All Weather Fighter Squadron , which had prevailed over two other Canadian F - 101 units in competition in May 1970 . Final selection of U . S . Air National Guard participants was made by the National Guard Bureau . Selections were based on unit performance over the preceding 18 - month period . An evaluation team from Hq ADC selected competitors from among units nominated by ADC ’ S six air divisions . Each team was made up of four aircrews , two weapons control teams , the maintenance support element , and members of the weapons loading team . No substitutions were allowed except in the aircrews , where one spare crew was authorized . Each team had to declare its four participating aircraft the evening before the flying competition began . No spare aircraft were authorized . The maintenance support element played a major role in determining the degree of success of each team . Events for William Tell ’ 70 began with the arrival of aircraft and crews on Thursday , 22 October . The next day crews were briefed on the competition rules and local procedures , and members of weapons load teams were given written examinations . Shakedown flights were conducted over the weekend . Final briefings on the rules were conducted under the supervision of the Chief Judge , Major General Donavon F . Smith , Director of Operational Requirements and Development Plans , DCS / R & D , Hq USAF . Formal competition began on the morning of 26 October . Each team was scheduled for three live - firing missions conducted during daylight hours and one electronic countermeasures ( ECM ) dry - firing mission conducted at night . All four team aircraft were charged with a firing attempt on each mission . Points were awarded for making assigned takeoff and recovery times and for the use of proper intercept control procedures . Live - firing point scores were awarded , based on the type of armament used and the linear miss distance in feet from the aim point on the target . The ECM mission scores were determined from signal inputs recorded on weapon system evaluators , which were loaded on the aircraft in place of live armament . In addition to the firing missions , each team participated in a weapons loading competition . Load teams were evaluated on the proper use of equipment and procedures and on the time required to complete the load . Strict adherence to safety criteria was essential to achieving a good score in the weapons loading competition . The final sorties of the meet were flown on the morning of Saturday , 31 October . Targets for the William Tell live - firing missions were the BQM - 33A drone and the TDU - 25B towed target . The former , a subsonic , jet - propelled drone , is remote - controlled from the ground and can carry either the MATTS or BIDOPS scoring system . The TDU - 25B , towed on a 26 , 000 - foot cable by an F - 101 “ tractor ” aircraft , burns butane to generate a constant heat source . It uses the BIPODS scoring system and is designed as a target for infrared “ heat seeking ” missiles . The MATTS scoring system , which scored all ATR - 2A rocket shots during the competition , uses transmitting devices in the target , in the interceptor aircraft , and in the rocket itself . A ground receiver / computer system receives and processes inputs from the airborne transmitters and depicts the rocket impact point in relation to the aim point in X , Y , and Z coordinates . The BIDOPS system , which scored all shots of the AIM - family missiles , incorporates a recording system in the target that senses linear missile miss distance and transmits this information to a ground receiver station . Competition was keen in all categories , and winners were not determined until the last mission had been flown . The F - l01 overall category winner was the Air National Guard 119th Fighter Group from Fargo , North Dakota . The 119th also captured the aircrew / maintenance team trophy . The weapons loading competition was won by the Canadian 409th AW ( F ) Squadron from Comox , British Columbia , while the controllers of ADC ’ s 60th Fighter Interceptor Squadron from Otis AFB , Massachusetts , prevailed over the other F - 101 weapons directors . Guardsmen of the 148th Fighter Group , Duluth , Minnesota , swept the F - 102 category , winning all except the weapons loading event , which went to the 124th Fighter Group from Boise , Idaho . In the F - 106 category , the 71st Fighter Interceptor Squadron from Malmstrom AFB , Montana , was the overall winner ; it also captured the aircrew / maintenance team award . The 84th Fighter Interceptor Squadron from Hamilton AFB , California , was victorious in the weapons control and weapons loading competitions . William Tell ’ 70provided a means of evaluating the performance of aircrews , aircraft , and weapons in a competitive rather than a test environment . Results of five years of rigidly controlled test firings could be compared with the results achieved during a competition in which firing parameters were not absolutely dictated . William Tell ‘ 70 firing results were carefully analyzed and added to the existing ADC data bank . To enhance this effort , data collection was given much greater emphasis during the 1970 meet as compared to previous meets . William Tell ’ 70 differed from previous interceptor weapons meets in other respects , also . The prevailing theme of the competition was austerity . All efforts were directed at conducting the meet within the budget , approximately one - tenth of the 1965 William Tell budget , and these efforts were successful , no additional funds being authorized . The costs of the meet were defrayed by using funds that had been allocated to Headquarters Aerospace Defense Command , the Air Defense Weapons Center , and the participating units . At the conclusion of the meet , General John D . Ryan , Chief of Staff , USAF , sent a message to Lieutenant General Thomas K . McGehee , Commander , Aerospace Defense Command , which read in part : As the ramp at Tyndall is emptying and interceptor units are returning home , I want to congratulate you and members of your command for having conducted a highly successful “ William Tell ” Weapons Meet . This meet is particularly pleasing in that you have accomplished all of the objectives at less than one - tenth of the cost for prior competitions . Congratulations again for a spectacular accident / incident free Weapons Meet . Nine teams competed in William Tell ’ 70 , compared to 16 in 1965 . The schedule of competitive events was given careful consideration , taking into account such contingencies as weather delays and scoring system failures . The result was a compressed schedule that provided for completion of the meet , with ample provision for makeup missions , in one week . Another objective of William Tell ’ 70 was to evaluate the capabilities of current air defense weapon systems . The second - generation interceptors performed much as expected . The results were highly satisfactory , considering the aircraft , armament and targets used . There is still , of course , room for improvement . One can only speculate what would have happened to the scores if more realistic targets , such as supersonic drones or more maneuverable targets , had been used . William Tell ’ 70 further substantiated the requirement for more sophistication and greater reliability in air defense weapon systems . The air defense interceptors currently in use have been around for a long time . The F - 106 , our most modern and effective vehicle , first appeared on the design board in 1949 and has been in active service since 1959 . The F - 106 is an excellent aircraft which does a fine job in terms of the state of the art for the 1960s . But the state of the art has changed , and systems modifications have not adequately kept pace . To combat technological advances in existence , a new interceptor is needed , a high - speed , long - range aircraft capable of standoff engagement of hostile targets ; an interceptor capable of detecting and tracking a target at ranges in excess of 100 miles and then launching and controlling armament in a successful attack regardless of target speed , altitude , maneuver ability , or countermeasures . When this goal is realized , air defense forces will have far greater potential , and effective mission performance will be better assured . In conclusion , it might be appropriate to mention the words of General McGehee , spoken during the awards presentation on 31 October 1970 : “ There are no losers in William Tell , only winners . ” William Tell ’ 70 was concluded successfully and without accident or incident , a tribute to the skill and professionalism of each individual who was involved . Hq United States Air Force Contributor Lieutenant Colonel Joseph L . Phinney ( B . A . , Syracuse University ) is Commander , Fifth Fighter Interceptor Squadron , Aerospace Defense Command , Minot AFB , North Dakota . He was ADC project officer for the William Tell Meet , 1970 . He has served as weapons director and operations staff officer , SAGE ; as reconnaissance liaison officer in Vietnam ; and as Chief , Interceptor Branch , Weapons Division , DCS / Operations , Hq ADC . Disclaimer The conclusions and opinions expressed in this document are those of the author cultivated in the freedom of expression , academic environment of Air University . They do not reflect the official position of the U . S . Government , Department of Defense , the United States Air Force or the Air University .