View allAll Photos Tagged vulnerability
vul-ner-a-bil-i-ty
–adjective
1. capable of or susceptible to being wounded or hurt, as by a weapon: a vulnerable part of the body.
2. open to moral attack, criticism, temptation, etc.: an argument vulnerable to refutation; He is vulnerable to bribery.
finding myself standing in Canary Wharf at the end of Sep 08, i was struck by being surrounded by huge buildings at risk of collapse, at least financial collapse.
although not an amazing photo (really need to get a camera other than my mobile!) i think it speaks of the immense vulnerability in previously assumed places of power at this point in history.
One of the reasons I started this project was to try and improve my body image.. which is actually pretty bad at the moment, though I think that's more down to putting on a few pounds than to doing 365s... anyway hence the photo, in an attempt to remind myself I look ok at least sometimes :-)
Attention shoppers, need a quick pick me up? Why don't you head on over to our coffee corner and pick yourself up a half-calf-carmel machiato. But remember, coffee can be hot... it can have an intensity like you've never felt before... searing deep into your flesh... your tender... vulnerable... so easily hurt flesh. So, be sure to ask for a protective sleeve when you pick up your coffee... maybe ask for another one to slip over your heart. Thank you!
Quote from The Perfect Man
Every day we post our pictures... every day we encounter people... we make ourselves vulnerable... we have a choice... do we hide or do we stick out our neck and hope we find trust.
Highest position: Front Page
Highest position: 46 on Monday, February 5, 2007
This little one was waiting outside a grocery store in Vancouver for her momma but the automatic doors were driving her bonkers. So I sat with her until momma was done, and we had a sweet visit.
She's old enough to know better
Cry baby cry
cry cry cry
Make your mother sigh
She's old enough to know better
So cry baby cry.
Vulnerable indigenous families worried about losing their children will now have a stronger voice in court through the Aboriginal Family Healing Court Conference pilot program that includes band Elders in proceedings as a source of support and guidance.
Learn more: news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2017CFD0001-000131
This little baby robin was pecking round the floor under cafe tables! It was only a couple of metres away.
An adult male sand lizard (Lacerta agilis) basks in the open in his conspicuous breeding colours. Not only is he vulnerable to predators such as kestrels but he is also on a particular scrap of heath that requires urgent management (although a small amount was done last winter) to prevent gorse encroachment. Five years ago I recorded around 60 animals in less than half one hectare, yesterday numbers seen were around 10% of that. Taken during a licensed survey, and the individual lizard was not disturbed.
Lessons learned over Europe and the Pacific showed that the B-24 was vulnerable to attacks from the front—a problem it shared with the B-17. In the field, B-24 crews jammed as many machine guns as possible into the glasshouse nose of the B-24D (some B-24s at Ploesti had five or six guns in a nose designed only for three at most), but this was not the solution.
Consolidated experimented with various kinds of modifications until settling on a redesigned nose with a manned turret (unlike the remote chin turret on the B-17G). This would cause some loss of aerodynamics on an aircraft already known for its difficult handling, but it at least would give the B-24 better defense from forward attacks. The redesign also made the nose roomier, added chin windows for the bombardier, enlarged the dorsal and tail turrets for better visibility, and enclosed the waist positions. The wet wing used by the B-24D was deleted in favor of self-sealing fuel tanks, eliminating the B-24’s tendency to catch fire.
Production shifted to the B-24H in late 1943, but there was a shortage of the electrically-powered Emerson nose turret, and so a hydraulically-powered Sperry turret was used on the B-24J. If that was not confusing enough, Consolidated also produced a lighter version, the B-24L, with no ball or tail turrets, leaving it to individual groups to install heavier turrets, flexible mounts, or no armament at all. All three were produced at once, and all three were used in increasingly heavy combat over Europe.
Though losses climbed over Europe, the aircraft could at least be easily replaced, for by the introduction of the B-24H/J series, Liberator production had truly hit its stride. Four factories were producing B-24s, but the most famous and efficient was Ford’s Willow Run plant, which by 1944 was producing one bomber per hour—crews fresh from training would arrive at Willow Run around nightfall, and pick up their new B-24 the next morning. The B-24 would not only become the most produced bomber of World War II, it would be the most produced American combat aircraft in history—no less than 18,482 Liberators would come off the line by the end of the war.
B-24Js and like variants would see heavy service worldwide, replacing the B-17 entirely in the Pacific and supplementing it over Europe. B-24s would bomb both Berlin and attack the southernmost Japanese home islands. Besides acting as strategic bombers, Liberators would also act as antisubmarine maritime patrol aircraft for the RAF, the USAAF, and the US Navy as the PB4Y-1; the latter would also be converted to primitive cruise missiles in Operation Aphrodite against German V-weapon sites in Belgium. One Aphrodite mission would claim the life of Joseph Kennedy Jr., older brother of future President John F. Kennedy. Still others would be converted to long-range transports, flying fuel over the Himalayas “Hump” in support of operations in China, and two would be converted to executive transports for both Winston Churchill and Franklin D. Roosevelt, the latter becoming the first of many Presidential aircraft. By 1945, it was possible to find B-24s literally everywhere, from Alaska’s cold Aleutians to sunny Brazil, from China to Italy.
After the end of World War II, the USAAF rapidly scrapped nearly its entire B-24 fleet, but a few soldiered on in the 1960s, mainly in India, where they operated as maritime patrol aircraft. Others served as seed aircraft for postwar airlines, including Qantas of Australia. By 1968, however, nearly all B-24s had disappeared from inventories worldwide; today, only 14 complete Liberators are left, with two aircraft flyable.
"Lassie, I'm Home" was a B-24L assigned to the 7th Bomb Wing at Pandaveswar, India in the China-Burma-India (CBI) theater of war. The B-24L was an attempt to lighten the heavy B-24J a little and make it less sluggish; the nose and tail turrets were left off the aircraft at the Willow Run plant in Michigan, and installed as necessary in the field. Most L models replaced the nose turret with a lighter ring mount, which made the B-24L less nose heavy. This would be important for the 7th BG, since its operations would take it over the Himalayas for operations against Japanese forces in China. The 7th had an interesting war long before it arrived in India in 1943: its B-17s had come under attack at Pearl Harbor, and the group was whittled down to almost nothing in the dark days of early 1942, in an attempt to defend the Dutch East Indies (now Indonesia) from Japanese invasion.
"Lassie" (the name refers to the Scottish term, not the dog) made it through the war and returned home to the US, to be scrapped at Walnut Ridge, Arkansas. The scrapyard's owner, Minot Pratt, thought the nose art worthy of preservation and had it axed out of the aircraft. Later, it ended up with the Commemorative Air Force and loaned to the EAA AirVenture Museum, where I saw it in May 2018.
Apparently Lassie just stepped out of the shower, and is a bit surprised to see her guy. This was based on a famous pinup in Yank magazine, and reproduced several times in nose art.
+++ DISCLAIMER +++
Nothing you see here is real, even though the conversion or the presented background story might be based on historical facts. BEWARE!
Some background:
The Grumman Mohawk began as a joint Army-Marine program through the then-Navy Bureau of Aeronautics (BuAer), for an observation/attack plane that would outperform the light and vulnerable Cessna L-19 Bird Dog. In June 1956, the Army issued Type Specification TS145, which called for the development and procurement of a two-seat, twin turboprop aircraft designed to operate from small, unimproved fields under all weather conditions. It would be faster, with greater firepower, and heavier armor than the Bird Dog, which had proved very vulnerable during the Korean War.
The Mohawk's mission would include observation, artillery spotting, air control, emergency resupply, naval target spotting, liaison, and radiological monitoring. The Navy specified that the aircraft had to be capable of operating from small "jeep" escort class carriers (CVEs). The DoD selected Grumman Aircraft Corporation's G-134 design as the winner of the competition in 1957. Marine requirements contributed an unusual feature to the design: since the Marines were authorized to operate fixed-wing aircraft in the close air support (CAS) role, the mockup featured underwing pylons for rockets, bombs, and other stores, and this caused a lot of discord. The Air Force did not like the armament capability of the Mohawk and tried to get it removed. On the other side, the Marines did not want the sophisticated sensors the Army wanted, so when their Navy sponsors opted to buy a fleet oil tanker, they eventually dropped from the program altogether. The Army continued with armed Mohawks (and the resulting competence controversy with the Air Force) and also developed cargo pods that could be dropped from underwing hard points to resupply troops in emergencies.
In mid-1961, the first Mohawks to serve with U.S. forces overseas were delivered to the 7th Army at Sandhofen Airfield near Mannheim, Germany. Before its formal acceptance, the camera-carrying AO-1AF was flown on a tour of 29 European airfields to display it to the U.S. Army field commanders and potential European customers. In addition to their Vietnam and European service, SLAR-equipped Mohawks began operational missions in 1963 patrolling the Korean Demilitarized Zone.
Germany and France showed early interest in the Mohawk, and two OV-1s were field-tested by both nations over the course of several months. No direct orders resulted, though, but the German Bundesheer (Army) was impressed by the type’s performance and its capability as an observation and reconnaissance platform. Grumman even signed a license production agreement with the French manufacturer Breguet Aviation in exchange for American rights to the Atlantic maritime patrol aircraft, but no production orders followed.
This could have been the end of the OV-1 in Europe, but in 1977 the German government, primarily the interior ministry and its intelligence agency, the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), showed interest in a light and agile SIGINT/ELINT platform that could fly surveillance missions along the inner-German border to the GDR and also to Czechoslovakia. Beyond visual reconnaissance with cameras and IR sensors, the aircraft was to be specifically able to identify and locate secret radio stations that were frequently operated by Eastern Block agents (esp. by the GDR) all across Western Germany, but primarily close to the inner-German border due to the clandestine stations’ low power. The Bundeswehr already operated a small ELINT/ECM fleet, consisting of converted HFB 320 ‘Hansa’ business jets, but these were not suited for stealthy and inconspicuous low flight level missions that were envisioned, and they also lacked the ability to fly slowly enough to locate potential “radio nests”.
The pan and the objective were clear, but the ELINT project caused a long and severe political debate concerning the operator of such an aerial platform. Initially, the Bundesheer, who had already tested the OV-1, claimed responsibility, but the interior ministry in the form of the German customs department as well as the German police’s Federal Border Guard, the Bundesgrenzschutz and the Luftwaffe (the proper operator for fixed-wing aircraft within the German armed forces), wrestled for this competence. Internally, the debate and the project ran under the handle “Schimmelreiter” (literally “The Rider on the White Horse”), after a northern German legendary figure, which eventually became the ELINT system’s semi-official name after it had been revealed to the public. After much tossing, in 1979 the decision was made to procure five refurbished U.S. Army OV-1As, tailored to the German needs and – after long internal debates – operate them by the Luftwaffe.
The former American aircraft were hybrids: they still had the OV-1A’s original short wings, but already the OV-1D’s stronger engines and its internal pallet system for interchangeable electronics. The machines received the designation OV-1G (for Germany) and were delivered in early 1980 via ship without any sensors or cameras. These were of Western German origin, developed and fitted locally, tailored to the special border surveillance needs.
The installation and testing of the “Schimmelreiter” ELINT suite lasted until 1982. It was based on a Raytheon TI Systems emitter locator system, but it was locally adapted by AEG-Telefunken to the airframe and the Bundeswehr’s special tasks and needs. The system’s hardware was stowed in the fuselage, its sensor arrays were mounted into a pair of underwing nacelles, which occupied the OV-1’s standard hardpoints, allowing a full 360° coverage. In order to cool the electronics suite and regulate the climate in the internal equipment bays, the OV-1G received a powerful heat exchanger, mounted under a wedge-shaped fairing on the spine in front of the tail – the most obvious difference of this type from its American brethren. The exact specifications of the “Schimmelreiter” ELINT suite remained classified, but special emphasis was placed upon COMINT (Communications Intelligence), a sub-category of signals intelligence that engages in dealing with messages or voice information derived from the interception of foreign communications. Even though the “Schimmelreiter” suite was the OV-1Gs’ primary reconnaissance tool, the whole system could be quickly de-installed for other sensor packs and reconnaissance tasks (even though this never happened), or augmented by single modules, what made upgrades and mission specialization easy. Beyond the ELINT suite, the OV-1G could be outfitted with cameras and other sensors on exchangeable pallets in the fuselage, too. This typically included a panoramic camera in a wedge-shaped ventral fairing, which would visually document the emitter sensors’ recordings.
A special feature of the German OV-1s was the integration of a brand new, NATO-compatible “Link-16” data link system via a MIDS-LVT (Multifunctional Information Distribution System). Even though this later became a standard for military systems, the OV-1G broke the ground for this innovative technology. The MIDS was an advanced command, control, communications, computing and intelligence (C4I) system incorporating high-capacity, jam-resistant, digital communication links for exchange of near real-time tactical information, including both data and voice, among air, ground, and sea elements. Outwardly, the MIDS was only recognizable through a shallow antenna blister behind the cockpit.
Even though the OV-1Gs initially retained their former American uniform olive drab livery upon delivery and outfitting in German service, they soon received a new wraparound camouflage for their dedicated low-level role in green and black (Luftwaffe Norm 83 standard), which was better suited for the European theatre of operations. In Luftwaffe service, the OV-1Gs received the tactical codes 18+01-05 and the small fleet was allocated to the Aufklärungsgeschwader (AG) 51 “Immelmann”, where the machines formed, beyond two squadrons with RF-4E Phantom IIs, an independent 3rd squadron. This small unit was from the start based as a detachment at Lechfeld, located in Bavaria/Southern Germany, instead of AG 51’s home airbase Bremgarten in South-Western Germany, because Lechfeld was closer to the type’s typical theatre of operations along Western Germany’s Eastern borders. Another factor in favor of this different airbase was the fact that Lechfeld was, beyond Tornado IDS fighter bombers, also the home of the Luftwaffe’s seven HFB 320M ECM aircraft, operated by the JaBoG32’s 3rd squadron, so that the local maintenance crews were familiar with complex electronics and aircraft systems, and the base’s security level was appropriate, too.
With the end of the Cold War in 1990, the OV-1Gs role and field of operation gradually shifted further eastwards. With the inner-German Iron Curtain gone, the machines were now frequently operated along the Polish and Czech Republic border, as well as in international airspace over the Baltic Sea, monitoring the radar activities along the coastlines and esp. the activities of Russian Navy ships that operated from Kaliningrad and Saint Petersburg. For these missions, the machines were frequently deployed to the “new” air bases Laage and Holzdorf in Eastern Germany.
In American service, the OV-1s were retired from Europe in 1992 and from operational U.S. Army service in 1996. In Germany, the OV-1 was kept in service for a considerably longer time – with little problems, since the OV-1 airframes had relatively few flying hours on their clocks. The Luftwaffe’s service level for the aircraft was high and spare parts remained easy to obtain from the USA, and there were still OV-1 parts in USAF storage in Western German bases.
The German HFB 320M fleet was retired between 1993 and 1994 and, in part, replaced by the Tornado ECR. At the same time AG 51 was dissolved and the OV-1Gs were nominally re-allocated to JaboG 32/3. With this unit the OV-1Gs remained operational until 2010, undergoing constant updates and equipment changes. For instance, the machines received in 1995 a powerful FLIR sensor in a small turret in the aircraft’s nose, which improved the aircraft’s all-weather reconnaissance capabilities and was intended to spot hidden radio posts even under all-weather/night conditions, once their signal was recognized and located. The aircrafts’ radio emitter locator system was updated several times, too, and, as a passive defensive measure against heat-guided air-to-air missiles/MANPADS, an IR jammer was added, extending the fuselage beyond the tail. These machines received the suffix “Phase II”, even though all five aircraft were updated the same way.
Reports that the OV-1Gs were furthermore retrofitted with the avionics to mount and launch AIM-9 Sidewinder AAMs under the wing tips for self-defense remained unconfirmed, even more so because no aircraft was ever seen carrying arms – neither the AIM-9 nor anything else. Plans to make the OV-1Gs capable of carrying the Luftwaffe’s AGM-65 Maverick never went beyond the drawing board, either. However, BOZ chaff/flare dispenser pods and Cerberus ECM pods were occasionally seen on the ventral pylons from 1998 onwards.
No OV-1G was lost during the type’s career in Luftwaffe service, and after the end of the airframes’ service life, all five German OV-1Gs were scrapped in 2011. There was, due to worsening budget restraints, no direct successor, even though the maritime surveillance duties were taken over by Dornier Do 228/NGs operated by the German Marineflieger (naval air arm).
General characteristics:
Crew: Two: pilot, observer/systems operator
Length: 44 ft 4 in (13.53 m) overall with FLIR sensor and IR jammer
Wingspan: 42 ft 0 in (12.8 m)
Height: 12 ft 8 in (3.86 m)
Wing area: 330 sq. ft (30.65 m²)
Empty weight: 12,054 lb (5,467 kg)
Loaded weight: 15,544 lb (7,051 kg)
Max. takeoff weight: 18,109 lb (8,214 kg)
Powerplant:
2× Lycoming T53-L-701 turboprops, 1,400 shp (1,044 kW) each
Performance:
Never exceed speed: 450 mph (390 knots, 724 km/h)
Maximum speed: 305 mph (265 knots, 491 km/h) at 10,000 ft (3,050 m)
Cruise speed: 207 mph (180 knots, 334 km/h) (econ cruise)
Stall speed: 84 mph (73 knots, 135 km/h)
Range: 944 mi (820 nmi, 1,520 km) (SLAR mission)
Service ceiling: 25,000 ft (7,620 m)
Rate of climb: 3,450 ft/min (17.5 m/s)
Armament:
A total of eight external hardpoints (two ventral, three under each outer wing)
for external loads; the wing hardpoints were typically occupied with ELINT sensor pods, while the
ventral hardpoints frequently carried 300 l drop tanks to extend loiter time and range;
Typically, no offensive armament was carried, even though bombs or gun/missile pods were possible.
The kit and its assembly:
This build became a submission to the “Reconnaissance” Group Build at whatifmodellers.com in July 2021, and it spins further real-world events. Germany actually tested two OV-1s in the Sixties (by the German Army/Bundesheer, not by the air force), but the type was not procured or operated. The test aircraft carried a glossy, olive drab livery (US standard, I think) with German national markings.
However, having a vintage Hasegawa OV-1A in the stash, I wondered what an operational German OV-1 might have looked like, especially if it had been operated into the Eighties and beyond, in the contemporary Norm 83 paint scheme? This led to this purely fictional OV-1G.
The kit was mostly built OOB, and the building experience was rather so-so – after all, it’s a pretty old mold/boxing (in my case the Hasegawa/Hales kit is from 1978, the mold is from 1968!). Just a few things were modified/added in order to tweak the standard, short-winged OV-1A into something more modern and sophisticated.
When searching for a solution to mount some ELINT sensor arrays, I did not want to copy the OV-1B’s characteristic offset, ventral SLAR fairing. I rather settled for the late RV-1D’s solution with sensor pods under the outer wings. Unfortunately, the OV-1A kit came with the type’s original short wings, so that the pods had to occupy the inner underwing pair of hardpoints. The pods were scratched from square styrene profiles and putty, so that they received a unique look. The Mohawk’s pair of ventral hardpoints were mounted, but – after considering some drop tanks or an ECM pod there - left empty, so that the field of view for the ventral panoramic camera would not be obscured.
Other small additions are some radar warning sensor bumps on the nose, some extra antennae, a shallow bulge for the MIDS antenna on the spine, the FLIR turret on the nose (with parts from an Italeri AH-1 and a Kangnam Yak-38!), and I added a tail stinger for a retrofitted (scratched) IR decoy device, inspired by the American AN/ALG-147. This once was a Matchbox SNEB unguided missile pod.
Painting and markings:
For the intended era, the German Norm 83 paint scheme, which is still in use today on several Luftwaffe types like the Transall, PAH-2 or CH-53, appeared like a natural choice. It’s a tri-color wraparound scheme, consisting of RAL 6003 (Olivgrün), FS 34097 (Forest Green) and RAL 7021 (Teerschwarz). The paints I used are Humbrol 86 (which is supposed to be a WWI version of RAL 6003, it lacks IMHO yellow but has good contrast to the other tones), Humbrol 116 and Revell 9. The pattern itself was adapted from the German Luftwaffe’s Dornier Do 28D “Skyservants” with Norm 83 camouflage, because of the type’s similar outlines.
A black ink washing was applied for light weathering, plus some post-shading of panels with lighter shades of the basic camouflage tones for a more plastic look. The cockpit interior was painted in light grey (Humbrol 167), while the landing gear and the interior of the air brakes became white. The scratched SLAR pods became light grey, with flat di-electric panels in medium grey (created with decal material).
The cockpit interior was painted in a rather light grey (Humbrol 167), the pilots received typical olive drab Luftwaffe overalls, one with a white “bone dome” and the other with a more modern light grey helmet.
The decals were improvised. National markings and tactical codes came from TL Modellbau sheets, the AG 51 emblems were taken from a Hasegawa RF-4E sheet. The black walkways were taken from the Mohak’s OOB sheet, the black de-icer leading edges on wings and tail were created with generic black decal material. Finally, the model was sealed with a coat of matt acrylic varnish (Italeri).
An interesting result, and the hybrid paint scheme with the additional desert camouflage really makes the aircraft an unusual sight, adding to its credibility.
Vulnerability this week for FYV. Nothing more vulnerable than getting naked... And somehow it feels like the sense of space around the torso adds to its vulnerability.
Clearly I'm too British to get naked myself (or ask anyone else to), so I used a sculpture i did in life class years ago instead.
blog.If you like my pictures, please support me by liking my facebook page!
I woke up very early this morning, & it was really gross and rainy outside. So, I decided to go out and take pictures. I took a lot of ones I actually liked, to my surprise. So, I have a bunch more in comments.
I hope all of you have a lovely thanksgiving! :)
Ron Mueck's Wild Man (2005): A 2.75 metre man on show at the National Gallery of Victoria.
Read more about this amazing exhibition on my blog.
Shot on Fujifilm Superia 1600 colour film
October 9, 2105 - LIMA, Peru. World Bank / IMF Annual Meetings. Finance Ministers of the ‘Vulnerable Twenty’ (V20) have their inaugural meeting. Photo: Dakota Fine / World Bank
Vulnerability is the core of shame, fear & our struggle for worthiness, but also the birthplace of joy, belonging & love. -Brene Brown
Impala Fawn @ Kruger National Park
When the first rain comes most herbivores give birth.
It´s the time of plenty; for the predators as well as for the prey.
Do you exploit your partner’s vulnerability? Or stand guard over it?
Although to differing degrees, we all need our psychological defenses. They protect us from experiencing an otherwise unsettling anxiety. Or an ancient sense of inferiority, or shame that may go all the way back to c...
howdoidate.com/relationships/communication/why-you-need-t...
Please don't tell me that I am the only one thats vulnerable... Impossible..
Love this song Vulnerable by Secondhand Serenade
All images copyright © ~~Remy G~~. All rights reserved. Use without permission is illegal.
Drewry's Bluff National Park (Richmond National Battlefield Park).
Richmond-Capital of the Confederacy
As capital of the newly formed Confederate States of America, Richmond, Virginia, became the constant target of northern armies. During the four years of the Civil War, Union generals made repeated attempts to capture the city by land. Richmond, however, was vulnerable by water as well as by land. Gunboats could navigate the James River all the way to Richmond. The key to the city's river defenses lay in a small fort only seven miles south of the capital. Known throughout the south as Drewry's Bluff, northern troops referred to it as Fort Darling.
Drewry's Bluff-Key to the River Defenses
Drewry's Bluff, named for local landowner Captain Augustus H. Drewry, rose 90 feet above the water and commanded a sharp bend in the James River, making it a logical site for defensive fortifications. On March 17,1862, the men of Captain Drewry's Southside Artillery arrived at the bluff and began fortifying the area. They constructed earthworks, erected barracks, dug artillery emplacements, and mounted three large seacoast guns (one 10-inch Columbiad and two 8-inch Columbiads) in the fort.
On May 9,1862, Norfolk fell to Union forces. The crew of the C.S.S. Virginia, forced to scuttle their vessel to prevent her capture, joined the Southside Artillery at Drewry's Bluff. Commander Ebeneezer Farrand supervised the defenses of the fort. He ordered numerous steamers, schooners, and sloops to be sunk as obstructions in the river beneath the bluff. Six more large guns occupied pits just upriver from the fort. Men worked around the clock to ensure a full state of readiness when the Union fleet arrived.
The Federal squadron steamed around the bend in the river below Drewry's Bluff early on the morning of May 15. The force, under Commander John Rodgers, consisted of five ships. The ironclad Galena and gunboats Port Royal, Aroostook, and Naugatuck joined the famous Monitor to comprise Rodgers' force. At 7:15 a.m. the Galena opened fire on the fort, sending three giant projectiles toward the Confederate position.
The five Union ships anchored in the river below the fort. When Confederate batteries in the fort replied, the whole vicinity shook with the concussion of the big guns. Southern infantry lined the banks of the river to harass the sailors. On the Monitor, the rifle balls of the sharpshooters "pattered upon the decks like rain."
On the bluff the defenders encountered several problems . The 10-inch Columbiad recoiled so violently on its first shot that it broke its carriage and remained out of the fight until near the end. A casemate protecting one of the guns outside the fort collapsed, rendering that piece useless.
After four long hours of exchanging fire, the "perfect tornado of shot and shell" ended. With his ammunition nearly depleted, Commander Rodgers gave the signal to discontinue the action at 11:30. His sailors suffered at least 14 dead and 13 wounded, while the Confederates admitted to 7 killed and 8 wounded. A visitor wrote that the Galena "looked like a slaughterhouse" after the battle. The massive fort on Drewry's Bluff had blunted the Union advance just seven miles short of the Confederate capital. Richmond remained safe.
Expansion at Drewry's Bluff 1862-1864
Following the repulse of the Union flotilla in May 1862, Drewry's Bluff saw no battle action for two years. Captain Sydney Smith Lee (General Robert E. Lee's brother) took command of the site and supervised its expansion and strengthening into a permanent fort. While some workers constructed an outer line of entrenchments to protect the land approach to Richmond, others built improvements for the fort, including a chapel, barracks, and quarters for the officers.
During this time, Drewry's Bluff became an important training ground for the Confederate Naval Academy and the Confederate Marine Corps Camp of Instruction. In May 1864, the fresh threat of an attacking Union force disrupted the daily routine at Drewry's Bluff.
Drewry's Bluff in the Bermuda Hundred Campaign, 1864
On May 5, 1864, Union Major General Benjamin F. Butler and his Army of the James landed at Bermuda Hundred, a neck of land only 15 miles south of Richmond. Marching overland, they advanced within three miles of Drewry's Bluff by May 9. While several Union regiments did manage to capture the fort's outer defenses, delays by Union generals spoiled the success. Confederate infantry under General P.G.T. Beauregard seized the initiative and successfully counterattacked on May 16. Once again a Union drive on Richmond met defeat at Drewry's Bluff. The area remained an integral part of Richmond's defense until the fall of Petersburg in April 1865.
Drewry's Bluff at the End of the War
The garrison at Drewry's Bluff took part in the evacuation of Richmond and Petersburg on April 2-3, 1865. Soldiers, sailors, and marines from the fort joined the movement westward, ultimately surrendering at Appomattox Court House. Many of the sailors served as infantry during the fighting along the way.
Union forces quickly cleared a path through the obstructions in the James River beneath Drewry's Bluff. On April 4, 1865, President Abraham Lincoln passed the fort on his way up the James to visit Richmond.