Antonov's OKA-38 "Aist" - Soviet copy of the Fieseler Storch

[Stargazer]

Here is the Antonov OKA-38. Not only was it an obvious copy of the German Fieseler Fi 156 Storch, it was also Antonov's very first aircraft (until then he had only designed and built gliders and motor gliders).

On top of its OKA- designation, it was also designated as the ShS, and was developed in two versions prefixed SS- (for Санитарный Самолет, for "sanitary aircraft"):

• The liaison version designated SS-1
• The ambulance version designated SS-2

I don't know what the designation ShS meant exactly. I'm under the impression that ShS was a company designator, while SS-1 and SS-2 were officially assigned by the Army... but I may be wrong. At any rate, the aircraft was not produced in quantity.

Also, I was pretty sure I'd seen the name Shmel ("bumblebee") for the OKA-38 but according to ucon, this is not correct and Aist ("Stork") was the real name. Perhaps this came from the www.spaceavia.ru website? I'm not so sure now. Let's stick to Aist for now, though I do wonder whether it was merely a nickname or an official name from either Antonov or the Army...

 

[ucon]

Full information you may find in the first volume of Antonov's Encyclipedia by Avico Press


Spaceavia site is full of mistakes, because the owner is very far away from aviation. He is an artist and draws everything iclude planes.

 

[ucon]

Some pix of SS-1 and SS-2

 

[Stargazer]

More OKA-38 pics:

 

[Stargazer]

Topic split. For some strange reason I was certain we already had the OKA-38 on this forum, but it would appear we didn't.

For this reason I have reworked the initial post a bit and added a series of pictures gleaned on the web.

 

[Stargazer]

More OKA-38:

• A better quality version of the painting posted above
• Another detailed two-page plan of the OKA-38
• Another color profile of the SS-1 liaison version
• Compared profiles of the OKA-38 and the Fi 156
• Compared specs of the OKA-38 and the Fi 156 (in Russian)
• A drawing of the OKA-38 in flight
• A modern three-view of the OKA-38

 

[Stargazer]

I was pretty sure I'd seen the name Shmel ("bumblebee") for the OKA-38 but according to ucon, this is not correct and Aist ("Stork") was the real name. Perhaps this came from the www.spaceavia.ru website? I'm not so sure now. Let's stick to Aist for now, though I do wonder whether it was merely a nickname or an official name from either Antonov or the Army...

Full information you may find in the first volume of Antonov's Encyclipedia by Avico Press
Spaceavia site is full of mistakes, because the owner is very far away from aviation. He is an artist and draws everything iclude planes.

ucon, allow me to say I find your answer here awfully disappointing. I could write the following in private, but since your comment was public, the clarification will also have to be so.

First, a forum member asks a question (the fact that it was me is irrelevant here):

• you reply but do not give an answer to the question (although you make it clear you know the answer)
• you prefer to point to the book you have published.

Now a bit of self-promotion doesn't kill, and I do not doubt for a second that the Avico Press book on Antonov is one of the best resources there are on the subject... Still, it's in Russian! I'm sure you know pretty well that most forum members don't read your native language fluently, so even if they DID purchase the book, they still couldn't find the answer to their particular questions... So why reply in the first place if it's only to do that?
The second disappointment here comes from your comment on spaceavia.ru. I do not know your personal history with that website (I don't even know who runs it), but it's the second time you've slashed some other author than yourself. Again, I know pretty well you are sitting on an impressive archive on Soviet aircraft, but criticizing others as amateurish or less-knowledgeable gives the impression that you are somewhat full of yourself (which I don't think you are, by the way).
Now allow me to go back over the comment that "the owner is very far away from aviation. He is an artist and draws everything including planes." If by "very far away from aviation" you mean that he is not a professional of the aircraft business (or a professional of aircraft publishing), then I suppose this relates to about 98% of all of us forum members here. That certainly shouldn't preclude the quality and dedication of the man's work, nor should it undermine in any way his efforts if the end result is good. The term "artist" also sounds pejorative in your sentence, which I think is a little inconsiderate. Again, not all aviation illustrators are engineers!

Let me add that when you say he "draws everything including planes", you are placing yourself in a strange and awkward position. Indeed, A LOT of the artwork on spaceavia.ru can also be found in the Avico Press publications and website. So it's a case of:

• either the webmaster there also does the artwork for your publications and reuses them on his own site (and in that case, why undermine his work?)
• or the webmaster there USED TO do the artwork for your publications (in which case you must have deemed them worthy at some point)
• or the webmaster there has swiped all these illustrations cold from your publications (and in that case, why say he "draws everything"?)

Whichever answer is the correct one, you are giving a strong feeling here that there is a bone of contention between you and that person. And though it may not be any of our business what happened between you in the past, you'll have to account here for the presence of the same illustrations on both sites with regard to the derogatory comments you made about the guy's artwork... which also happens to be featured in YOUR publications.

 

[ucon]

Dear Stargazer! I am absolutely not trying to advertise Aviko Press books, they are quite well known. And I have nothing against the artist who painted these pictures, he is a good man. It did not mean the mistakes of the artist, but about your mistakes, in particular with the names of aircraft. That's why I wrote to you, that is not very good to use drawings in isolation from their original publications.


I also understand that you are doing dozens of posts every day on the site SPF and is therefore very difficult to be correct. Do not be offended that you corrected. It is impossible to be an expert on all the aviation companies, especially which based on publications in the mass media. No serious study of the archives burn "bumblebees" and other wonders that simple SPF participants can take it as truth.



As you can see, dear Stargazer, I never give links to newspapers, magazines and websites. I only use the documents and archives.
I hope I have clearly stated my position. So it's nothing personal. With my respect to you/

 

[Stargazer]

As I said earlier, this wasn't about me. I was commenting on your position regarding spaceavia.ru and its apparent ambiguity. Nothing personal!

Allow me to repost here part of what you wrote to me in private:

« That guy did those pix for Avico Press in 1998 under my personal control, shoulder to shoulder. It was his first connection with aviation. He then began to draw space rockets and shuttles. Now we're using another software and another artist for a higher quality level. This is the simple truth, nothing more. »

I really think it deserved to be said. Thanks a lot Konstantin!

 

[Piper106]

Interested as what engine was being used in this airplane. As far as I knew no aircooled inline engines were built within the Soviet Union. Were they using an engine imported from one of the European Communist block states, such as an inline Walter engine from Czeckoslovakia??

 

[igor-mich]

Dear Piper106 I have a question for you what year Czechoslovakia was a Communist? For reference: OKA-38 was built in 1940.

 

[Piper106]

So sorry. My mistake, For some strange reason I was thinking this was a post WW2 project.

Doesn't change the question of what engine was used.

 

[igor-mich]

At OKA-38 engine was MV-6 (License frantsuzkogo engine Renault 6Q-01)

 

[bigvlada]

I know that this is a post-war aircraft, but this is still a Storch, although a smaller one than original. I have no problem with the eventual move of this post to the post war section.
A man decided to build replicas of the Storch, with several variants, including the one with the floats
http://www.slepcevstorch.com/storch.htm


The best part is, they come in kits, so you can built them yourself.

 

[riggerrob]

Feiseler Storch replicas have proven popular with amateur-builders. At least 4 different designers have offered plans to amateur builders.

The Slepcev Storch prototype first flew in 1994.

Ladislao Pazmany also designed a 3/4 scale Storch replica (PL-19) circa 1999. He sold plans to amateur builders.

The similar Carlson Criquet first flew in 1999, but crashed in 2000 (Ohio) killing the pilot and the project. The name Criquet comes from the Moraine Saulnier MS.505 version built in France after WW2.

Rag Wing RW-19 is a 3/4 scale replica that first flew in 1998 and plans were sold to amateur builders. At least 9 copies were built by amateurs.

 

[airman]

From de.wikipedia

The aircraft had rigid slats , flaps that could be extended up to 40 °, and a generously glazed pilot's cockpit. The landing gear was not retractable. The fuselage was welded from steel tubes, while the wings and the tail unit were made from fabric-covered wooden profiles.
Two variants were planned, a reconnaissance / liaison aircraft variant and an Antonov N-2 ambulance aircraft version for two lying wounded and an attendant with a door measuring 2.3 m × 1.1 m on the left.
The aircraft is an unlicensed replica of the Fieseler Fi 156 Storch, one of which was purchased by the Soviet Union in 1940. However, the Argus engine was replaced by an over-compressed French Renault MV-6 engine (nominal pressure height 2000 m). Like the original, the OKA-38 was characterized by good STOL properties, but did not fully match the quality of the original. The construction was carried out in 1940 on behalf of Stalin , but due to the advance of the German invaders into the Soviet Union, it was not built in series from 1941, as the intended production facility had to be evacuated.