Howdy folks,
Is anyone else burning thru their MIG-21 activations for no apparent reason.
Update the updater for 1.5.2 - used an activation

Can changing the USB port I use for my keyboard count as a large enough hardware change to use one ?

Can not having a USB device eg pedals not plugged in trigger this ?


My current count is now Zero activations left, if it triggers again what do I do?

Has anyone else experienced this ?

There were problems with the 21's drm, but I thought they had them fixed. Contact Leatherneck, they should replenish your activations.

I can't even get it to activate. My activation count is full but it just won't activate. I uninstalled it then after 1.5 was released re installed it. Unfortunately it still won't activate.

Recently LNS changed from the old-style to new-style activations (global vs. per-user IIRC). In any case there was a indicated but easily not-done step of deleting a particular registry entry belonging to the old method to not conflict with the new method.

You may be experiencing both methods somehow fighting with each other which would be solved by some manner of registry work.

On the other hand holding down certain keyboard keys (or if your joystick software does this for you) during loading it will force the activation dialog to appear. These don't force activations but allow them.

I think they changed now for a quantum style of activation system. You may have an activation... but not know what number exactly.

I mean... look at this:



Hahahaha

And when I said LNS quality is going towards VEAO range Cobra jumped like burned.

The DRM used for DCS and its modules is bad. Not bad as in evil or naughty, but bad like you bite into your sandwich and spit it out immediately bad.

It's always been bad. Every ED sim has had bad DRM. Some have been barely passable, others have been downright foul. None were worse than the disc-based "there's nothing wrong with our program, bring your PC and drive where it doesn't work here to Moscow and prove it" Starfarce junk. The current situation is considerably less odious, but still not what I would consider decent.



The Jedi Master

If you dont wanna use another activation, wait for the next OB patch,
I think Cobra mentioned that somewhere.

@Jedi Master
I don't think this is true.

I had no problem with the old Starforce DRM ED used for FC1. I had zero issues with modules in DCS World besides Mig21 which (sorry Cobra) I tend to blame LNS for.

With LNS track record of human errors and delays ad nauseam I think mistakes in compiling the code to accept the DRM are very plausible to sneak in the workflow. I am no expert in DRM or Starforce but I guess it is a very sensitive piece of software and the reason is like that is because it's trying to protect/lock the code/content against counterfeit by some complex code mojo/magic which becomes fragile at rush/carefulness/ADD or other human fun activities. So if one is not careful when adding the DRM to the stew when compiling the binaries the stew will be spoiled at least for some if not for all.

Thanks Cobra, we (I hope most of us saw it by now) know but... you said it is fixed for good as we moved from 1.2xx to 1.5x/2.0x. It's like with the delays... I (at least) reached the point where I simply don't believe all you say it is true. Sry...

I hope it will not transmit to Public version when patch will be released. The beta I skip... for lack of space on SSDs.

Lucky you. Rest assured, that puts you in the minority. Balancing that out is people who not only had issues getting it to work but had to go as far as reinstalling Windows.

Just because this is the first time DRM has bitten you doesn't mean this is unique, it just means the law of averages has finally caught you.





The Jedi Master

Did this thread get pruned , I thought I saw a hissy fit very un-professional reply from a dev on this earlier ???


............ or was it an illusion ?

Oh and I got a bunch more activations thankfully , this DRM is indeed pretty sh1te if doing pretty much nothing burns activations

No, I replied and then removed it.

If you genuinely believe that was a 'hissy-fit' -- it just confirms that even the slightest defense of oneself in here will be constituted as "unprofessional" behaviour and that I took the correct course of action.

Any update on the 'news' section of the site Cobra, it's still down?

Together with the next F-14 update, sometime towards middle of march.

ha ha.... good one!




Maybe, but you need to take into consideration that I have reinstalled FC1 and Ka50 etc quite a few times without issues. I also have witnessed my friends installing and reinstalling without problems. That doesn't mean I like this DRM in particular but I am just saying... I had no problem and I only heard about them in few cases. Far from majority.

If you are posting as the rep of a company I would assume a more tactful approach would be desired
when responding to your customers, the fact that you removed your post leads me to think that maybe it was a little badly worded and needed a re-think on how to word it to appear more professional.

No reasonable person would deny you the right of reply when dealing with posts that are about you

Activation issues, especially solved with a reg edit are the most minor issues. The only irritating thing is running out and waiting a couple days for support to reset them and LNS pre-kicked that one's butt so no problemo.

Can't wait! I feel the need...

We're as excited to fly it as you are. Big dream for all of us.

I ran DCSW OB 1.53 and did not have any activation issues. I think this was solved for me the last time there was registry-activation work done during the activation changeover. Since I did it back then I don't have to do it now. I would guess anyone who followed those steps in that patch notes in the past or simply installing it fresh probably do not have any issue.

Is the list of fixes http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=160112 current for 1.53 on the OB branch? I tested the R-55, R-3S, R-3R missiles but did not notice any differences between them in tone sound.

You may encounter an activation prompt when you run 1.5.3 Stable or 2.0 because you ran 1.5.3 Open Beta which had the bug. If so -- just rerun the registry fix and your 1 activation will be comped.

List of fixes is for both 1.5.3 OB and Stable.

Cobra

Does

1. Having a joystick un-plugged
2. Having my pedals un-plugged
3. Having a USB stick inserted into my PC
4. Having my phone charging on my PC's USB port

Does any of the above trigger a use of an activation ?

I have used 2 this week alone and the only thing that was different about my PC was the above

It shouldn't. I think it's based on a combined PC id key based on hardware but joysticks shouldn't count much if at all toward that. If you are "change of PC" it should say that specifically in the error message.

More likely it is some leftover from the registry location changeover or the different builds (alpha, beta, final) fighting over which build is doing which kind of activation.

It shouldn't but it does ,can I get and answer please Cobra ?

Down to 3 activations left and no clue as to why yet another one got used up

I think now is safe to put your phone to charge in the PC as the Mig21 is back in the hangar 18 disassembled and the engineers are trying to figure out how to properly connect the radar wires. With the next patch... it will work again... they say...

Me too - every time I update DCS I get activation messages for the Mig-21 and every time I run the activation tool it makes no difference the next time.

DCS 2.0.2.52262 Changelog
DCS 2.0.2.52262 will be published today.

NOTE
DCS MiG-21bis are not functional until next update.
Sorry for inconvenience.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2746356#post2746356

note also that if you are not able to download the updates from the changelog, it is because

From the update released today
The 2.0.2 version has a high CPU usage problem. We are working on a fix. Please do not update to this version a while.
Sorry for the inconvenience.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2745494&postcount=11

And who is to blame for the high CPU usage and further delay in the latest update??



http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2746039&postcount=2



http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2746220&postcount=147

And the "official response" from none other than "up the tree at VEAO"



http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2746602&postcount=148

So not only have the customers given up on VEAO, but it seems the ED testers have as well. This would have picked up if the Hawk was still installed on their systems when testing the latest patch, however my guess is everyone uninstalled it after the constant nando's jokes and no real work to be seen. The testers probably followed suit after the "texture artists computer blew up"

Jesus H tity f*****g christ

So much for the crack team of ED testers, do they actually spend time testing stuff or just going about forums harrassing people who complain about the shocking state of DCS world / modules ?

E-mail me directly at nicholas.dackard@gmail.com and I'll replace your key.

Thanks!
Nick

You guys have gone off the deep end.

The Hawk issues apparently are caused because VEAO does not test the Hawk with the CP installed on it. When they are happy they send it to ED and they add the CP.

Whoever came up with that brilliant idea should be freaking fired. Allowing another entity to test your module after changing it (adding CP, especially one as onerous as Starfucked) and putting it out is just asking for massive trouble.

Seriously, don't you have another delayed announcement / update to put out.

Sick burn, bro

Since you are not interested in writing up an official response as to why your customers will not be able to fly the Mig-21 in 2.0 until the "next update".....consider writing a response to this gent

Hello, Mr. Dackard;


After I read through the whole post concerning the MiG-21's negative angle of attack at low altitude and supersonic speeds (http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.ph...t=angle+attack) I was left with an uneasy suspicion that the answer, i.e. that a slight negative AoA was normal under such conditions, was really not correct.


I have several old MiG-21 references that show more detail about the construction of the MiG-21 bis, and they further suggest that perhaps your flight model may be affected, among other issues, by a discrepancy in the construction of the alignment of your MiG's nose-cone and inlet ring assembly.


I do not have your 3D model to examine, but my visual examination of this area of the 3D model of the aircraft, from close-ups of it in the game, suggest that the nose-cone center-line (i.e. the line drawn from the tip of the nose-cone perpendicular to the inlet ring) is parallel to the fuselage center-line. It also appears that the inlet ring itself is also constructed to be perpendicular to the fuselage center-line.

If so, and if your flight model takes this alignment into account, for purposes of considering the presence of disturbed airflow affecting available AoA, then the whole dynamic flight model may be adversely affected by this choice.


I say that because, in the real MiG-21 bis, the nose-cone and inlet ring center-lines are not aligned parallel to the fuselage center-line, but rather, they both have a 3 degree negative angle relative to aircraft center-line.

I confirmed this by corresponding with a Finnish Air Force pilot who has access to a MiG-21 bis in the museum at Kymi airbase near Kotka. Please take a look at the illustration that he forwarded to me.

This off-central alignment was done to make the airflow over the nose-cone, at supersonic speed, create the proper shock wave at the inlet ring. If the nose-cone and inlet ring are parallel to the fuselage center-line, then the shock-wave from the airflow over the MiG-21, at high speed AoA, would strike the inlet ring off-center, because the MiG-21 bis typically flies supersonic at a 3 degree positive AoA.


The real MiG 21 bis construction compensates for the 3 degree positive AoA at supersonic speed by aligning the tip of the cone and face of the inlet ring to be perpendicular to the airflow over the fuselage by canting them downwards by 3 degrees.



The normal MiG-21 bis positive cruise AoA is very much at odds with your present flight model which requires the plane be flown at a negative AoA under conditions described in the forum thread; in those circumstances, the shock wave would strike the inlet ring at an angle that would be 5.5 degrees off-center.

That would be the result if your cone and inlet were constructed at right angles to the fuselage center-line, which is what I suspect is the case in your 3D model.



I really doubt that your flight model, or DCS world for that matter, is this precise, but I offer this to you because the 3D model alignment of the MiG-21 nose-cone and inlet of your version of the MiG-21 appears to be wrong.

I really do believe that the negative AoA at low altitude and high speed is also wrong, but until the 3D model construction is confirmed as correct, then this can't be measured.


My last contact with the Finnish Air Force pilot tells me this:

"The whole MiG-21 nose intake including the lip and and the cone is really tilted slightly downwards to adjust the intake perpendicular to the average high speed flight airflow to ensure symmetrical airflow into the intake. This is specially important at supersonic speeds due to the cone produced shock wave formation. The angle to the fuselage reference line is 3 degrees (see the attached pictures). The angle is close to the wing angle of attack at high speeds.

The angle of attack of the MiG-21 is always positive when not flying inverted. The symmetrical airfoil wing does not produce positive lift at negative angle of attacks. At high speeds like 500 kt the lift coefficient at 8800 kg is about 0,15 which corresponds to an angle of attack of some 2-3 degrees.

I have flown the MiG-21BIS at at sea level (100 meters) at an indicated airspeed of 1300 km/h (1.06 Mach), which is the maximum allowed indicated airspeed (Vmo). It can go even faster, but this is the limit. At altitude you are limited to 2.05 Mach (Mmo) due to directional stability. It can go even faster, but this is the limit."


I hate to be the bearer of difficult news, but I think that there are some fundamental problems with the design of your 3D model and with the way the flight model of the MiG-21 itself is represented in DCS World.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2743214&postcount=1

Mustang didn't burn you, the model nose cone and no official response to this issue has done that for you.

How absolutely depressingly hilarious.

You decided to copy one severely unsubstantiated bug report and a lack of reply is indiciative of what, exactly?
This issue has been closed and the model is correct: https://leatherneck-sim.mantishub.com/view.php?id=287

1.5.3 to 1.5.4 stable ......... and another activation used

How come the MIG-21 activation out of ALL the modules is totally ballsed up ?

Well, what is unique to the 21?
From being totally hyped over buying the upcoming Viggen I have stopped reading their thread and is now very sure there will be no 1st day purchase.

Its used another one for no apparent reason , WTF is wrong with this??????????

This is why I did not install the 21 when I built a new sim rig.

I have not changed anything and yet it burned thru 2 activations

I don't activate unless I'm going to fly the 21, which I'm usually not. If you're not planning on flying the 21 that time, don't do it.
Not that it's a solution, mind you, just a way to use less up.


The Jedi Master

Think I may have stunmbled upon why the acivtation system for the MIG-21 is so sh1tty

I use vmware on my PC and if it is powered on it causes the MIG-21 to use another activation

Do you think this defect in the activation system could be fixed ?

Great thanks for replying

It is IF the virtual network adapter is ON then MIG-21 activated
and then disabled later when you try to play it again

None of the other modules do this apart from the MIG-21

I'm having issues with activations on my laptop. It doesnt recognize the valid key at all. SMH...