Sex Sells

I'm not a big fan of the J.J. Abrams Star Trek movies (also known as the Kelvin timeline).  The first one was okay. Then came Star Trek into Darkness and it was downright bad. There was one scene I thought was completely gratuitous when actress Alice Eve (playing Carol Marcus) stood around in her underwear.

Alice Eve is a lovely woman and as a testosterone-poisoned male, I enjoyed the scene, but even then, I thought it was completely unneeded. 

But, sex sells. 

Some women were upset at the Alice Eve scene. But have you looked at romance books lately? Here's an example:

It seems on a lot of romance books there are shirtless men. But sex sells.

In my novel Rock Killer, I had a character named Charlie Jones. After writing less than a paragraph, I changed Charlie from a man to a woman with the same name. And I made her an attractive woman because... sex sells. (I decided her name was Charlene but everyone called her "Charlie.") And, at the beginning of the book, Charlie is in a bathtub. Because... sex sells. In that scene I say:

"She soaped up a washcloth and rubbed it over her dark skin; Frank called it chocolate-cheesecake colored."

Have you noticed other examples of using sex to sell entertainment? Let me know in the comments below.

The above photos are being used under Section 107 of the Copyright Act: fair usage.

Favorite Fictional Characters

It's time once again for the "30 day blogging challenge" that I'm doing in approximately 30 weeks (depending on how many I skip).

This week's prompt: "Your favorite fictional characters."

I was having a hard time with this one. Captain Kirk? Maybe. Spock? Definitely. Gandalf from Lord of the Rings? Oh, yes.

Side note: One thing I loved about the Lord of the Rings movies was that to me they got Gandalf exactly right. Ian McKellen played Gandalf perfectly.

Then I realized, I could choose fictional characters I wrote. Such as Michael Vaughan from Agent of Artifice (and other "Adept Series" novels), or Titus Chumba (A/K/A Rick Bailey) from the "Treasures of Space" series (Treasure of the Black Hole, Treasure of the Pirate Planet, and Treasure of the Rogue Moon).

Side note: Michael Vaughn is in or mentioned in four of the five "Adept Series" novels. The only one he's not in is The Terror of Tombstone because he hasn't been born, yet (the novel is set in 1881 and Vaughn was born in 1927).

But probably my favorite of all the characters I've written is Charlene "Charlie" Jones from Rock Killer. She probably wouldn't think that because I put her in some awful situations (no spoilers). But she comes through with strength and tenacity. For a while during and after writing Rock Killer, I was in love with her. Or at least infatuated with her.

What's your favorite fictional character. Let me know below in the comments.

Charlie Hebdo, Sharia Law, and the Right to Be Offensive.

Three gunman killed twelve writers in Paris last Tuesday. The writers, who worked at the satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo, were likely targeted because the magazine had published a cartoon of Mohammad. As the BBC reported:

The satirical weekly has courted controversy in the past with its irreverent take on news and current affairs. It was firebombed in November 2011 a day after it carried a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad.

If you're a writer, you have to take notice. This attack is an assault on freedom of speech and your creative liberty. It is an attempt to dissuade anyone from violating Sharia Law's prohibition of making images of Mohammad.

Don't think this could affect you?  U.S. cartoonist Molly Norris of Seattle, Washington, had to go into hiding after suggesting that there be a "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" in response to censorship that itself was in response to death threats over a depiction of Mohammed.

In my novel, Rock Killer, some of the villains are Muslims. While they are more interested in political power than religious purity, if some splinter group of Muslims armed with AK-47s took offense, I might have to go into hiding. (I'm not very worried about this, to be honest.)

As artists and writers, we need to maintain our creative freedom and fight for our right to say what we want without fear of reprisal from terrorists or governments (I'm looking at you, Canada). Of course, what Canada does is not along the lines of what happened in Paris, but it comes from the same mindset of "You offended me, you must pay!"

Do I think you should post a cartoon of Mohammad? No. But you should not let this cow you into worrying about offending anyone with your writing. We can not back down even in the face of this evil.

But more than that, we must maintain our right to offend others. If we cannot offend anyone, we cannot do our craft. Someone, somewhere is likely to be offended by pretty much anything. No one has the right to demand not to be offended no matter if what offends them is a cross on a hill or the existence of hard core pornography.

And, because you never know who might come to power and decide what you write is "too offensive," you don't want government taking action to keep some from being offended (yes, Canada, I mean you). "What, you write about recovery from sexual abuse? That offends me!" And believe me, almost everything you write is likely to offend someone (this blog post might offend a few).

We can not let what happened in Paris stop us from writing what we want. We can not let the government or any organization stop us from writing what we want. Does that mean there will be stuff out there that offends us? Yes. But it is better to suffer that than have someone else decide if what we write is too offensive to be in print or on the web.

Four Novels

I have five published novels (see links above). But I also have four novels somewhere between writing "Chapter One" and being published. This is keeping me busy and a bit frustrated.

1) The Terror of Tombstone, a fantasy western (yes) is waiting to be edited at World Castle Publishing. We have a signed contract and so now it's just a matter of waiting (and working with the publisher on a cover design).

2) Treasure of the Black Hole is at a different publisher, still under consideration (I hope). I think I'll email them Monday for an update.

3) The Alien Fleet Wars was just emailed to my friend Sare for proofreading, after my wife proofread it. Next comes having my wife read it out loud to me, then another edit by me, then beta reads.

4) Untitled Treasure of the Black Hole sequel is my NaNoWriMo project. I have written just over 21,000 words but I haven't hit today's minimum quota of 1,667 words, yet. But I have written myself into a corner and I need to figure out how my hero is going to save himself . . . again!

My point? When I decided to write full time, at first I wrote occasionally. Now I'm writing nearly constantly. I'm not sure what I'll do after NaNoWriMo and that project is finished. I don't have any ideas at the moment. But I'm sure one will come to me. Maybe I'll do that long awaited Rock Killer sequel.

Reality versus Fantasy

Yesterday I did a review of the movie Gravity in which I excoriated the movie for scientific inaccuracy, especially when it comes to orbital dynamics.

And then I started thinking: why do I care?  I've watch Star Wars and Star Trek and hundreds of other science fiction movies that completely ignore science.  And I don't feel the need to correct their science.  Well, maybe if it's completely implausible.  Like the scene in Star Trek: First Contact that's supposed to be in "zero gravity" and vacuum yet you can see gasses interacting with air and people move as if they are in gravity ("magnetic boots" are the supposed reason why).  But I sort of shrug and go on.  Why?  Why did I care that Gravity had such bad science yet don't care that Star Trek does?

I think it's because Gravity was "real world" as in it was set in contemporary times and it involved places (Earth) and technology that exists.  It was the real world.  Star Wars is verging on fantasy (the creature living in the asteroid with creatures living inside it?) and Star Trek, at least before the J.J. Abrams versions, were at least marginally accurate and what wasn't accurate could usually be explained away by some technology that doesn't now exist.  (I lost a lot of respect for Mr. Abrams when I learned he wrote the awful movie Armageddon which has laugh-out-loud science errors).

I think there's a lesson here for writers.  You have to keep your audience in mind for how accurate you are gong to be on your research including science.  In my novel Rock Killer I tried to be as scientifically accurate as I could because I knew the audience for that novel would expect it.  Now I'm fair to middling with math (don't ask me to do calculus anymore) and sometimes I just don't think about everything that you have to think about.  So what I'm saying is, there are probably science errors in Rock Killer.  But I did my best to minimize them.  In my work in progress that is currently at a beta reader, The Treasure of the Black Hole, I also did my best to minimize science errors even though it is not what I would call "hard science fiction" like Rock Killer.

In my Adept Series of novels I also tried to be very historically accurate (they are set in the past) and also scientifically accurate within my fantasy framework.  Because it's a lot easier to check the historic record than calculate an orbit I knew I'd have lots of fact-checkers with those novels.  Someone might read it who know the actual historic details.  Again, that is because I was keeping my potential audience in mind.

How accurate to facts or science your novel is depends how who you are writing it for and what genre.  But I think glaring scientific errors will be pretty much noticed by anybody.  So unless it's a complete fantasy, you'd better get at least the basics correct.

I Invented eBooks and Indie Publishing . . . Sorta

Yes, I, S. Evan Townsend, invented ebooks and indie publishing.

Well, sort of.

About ten years ago I was selling stuff on eBay.  It was mostly old electronics I no longed had a need for because I'd upgraded.  But it got me thinking, what if I could see my book on eBay.  At the time I only had one finished book, Rock Killer.  But here was my thought process: I could sell directly to the readers and cut out the gatekeepers at the publishing houses who only seemed to want to publish stuff by established writers or authors who had agents.  I could convert the Word file of Rock Killer to a PDF and sell it on eBay.  Since the marginal cost of the PDF file was essentially zero, even if I sold it for 99 cents I'd be ahead.

The problem I saw was getting the attention of the readers (this was before most social media).

Then I had an idea that I should make a website called storytellers.com (except that URL was taken) and allow other writers up upload their books, convert them to PDF, and sell them directly to readers, the website taking a small cut.  And readers could leave reviews to help weed out the crap.  Does this sound familiar?

The only problem was I was working more than full time at my job and could see this costing a lot.

So, circa 2004 I invented ebooks (as PDFs) and indie publishing.  I just didn't do anything with either idea.  Now there's Wattpad which is a lot like my storytellers.com idea only readers don't pay.  And Amazon took the ebook concept further with the Kindle ereader and indie publishing has taken off with ereaders and print-on-demand technology.

Which I suppose is a lesson in, if you have a good idea, run with it.

"Adult" Content

The other day I noticed on my DVR's programming grid that Turner Classic Movies (TCM) was going to show Captain Blood.  It's been years since I've seen Captain Blood and I remembered it as a fun, entertaining old movie (made in 1935) that made a star out of Errol Flynn and introduced Olivia de Havilland to the world.  So, of course, I recorded it and watched it a few days later.  And yes, it was just as fun and good as I remembered, based on historical fact (with a few liberties thrown in) and a fun movie.  But I realized that there was zero sex (some slight hinting at prostitution) and the violence was bloodless and more of the bang-bang-you're-dead type or more hinted at than shown.   It certainly wasn't like the violence one sees in movies today.  Captain Blood was a movie I wouldn't have qualms about showing to a 10-year-old.

Captain Blood was apparently a big hit when it was released despite staring the then-unknown Flynn.  It was also nominated for a best-picture Oscar.  But by today's standards it is very tame.

And it got me thinking about how much "adult content" entertainment needs to have to be entertaining.  Captain Blood is entertaining with almost zero adult content.  But the movie Rush was also entertaining but had nudity, bad language, and violence (in the form of car crashes and fist fighting).

Back when Captain Blood was made, entertainers had no choice.  The U.S. used an obscenity standard that was based on English common law which required (according to Wikipedia) "any material that tended to 'deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences'" and that was interpreted to mean the most sensitive individuals in a society which meant children.  Which meant that all entertainment had to be okay for children.  A series of Supreme Court decisions, ending with Miller vs. California in 1973 redefined obscenity (which did not enjoy First Amendment protections) as work that "applies to prurient interest" and lacks "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value."  That last part has been a pretty big loophole and a lot squeezes through it judging by the dregs of our culture.  So your novel can have the raunchiest sex scenes and the most graphic violence and assuming it has literary or artistic value, there's no problem.  So pretty much the law no longer regulates what "adult content" entertainment can have.

So this is where the word "gratuitous" comes in.  What if in Captain Blood there was a sex scene, with nudity, with the prostitute.  What if during the sword fights there was blood gushing everywhere.  Would that be gratuitous?  It obviously wasn't needed since it's a fine film without it.  But the violence of Saving Private Ryan was there for a reason and the movie needed those graphic, bloody scenes to make its point about war and the "Greatest Generation."

My opinion on "adult content" is probably pretty typical: if it's needed, use it.  In my science fiction novel Rock Killer the "F-word" is used three times.  Why?  Because I felt in those bits of dialog only the F-word would suffice to convey the meaning I wanted to convey.

In my Adept Series novels I have tried to keep the "adult" content" to a minimum.  Swear words are mild, sex is off-screen (so to say), and while the violence gets bloody it's not belabored.  But there are things some might find offensive.  For instance, in the first Adept Series novel, Hammer of Thor, there's a scene where a doorman at a speakeasy says: "No niggers, chinks, or Irish."  (I had a conundrum about this at a public reading and bowdlerized myself.)  In fact, the "n-word" appears three times in Hammer of Thor and I just used it in my unnamed work in progress (which is set in 1881 when racism was ubiquitous).

I'm not one that gets easily offended but there are people who are.  Should we write for them?  No.  We should write for our intended audience.  "Adult content" should never be gratuitous but should be used when it's needed for the story and the message.  Sex, violence, and bad language have their place.  And some readers want gratuitous sex, violence, and bad language.  As with all writing, remember your audience and you probably won't go wrong.

Firing Guns in Space

Saturday on "Mythbusters" (which I didn't watch until Sunday night having DVR'd it), they fired a gun in a vacuum.  This was to see if a gun could fire in space.  (I didn't blog about this until today because I had to think about it for a bit because I was sure something was wrong.)

Now, I'm keenly interested in this subject because in my science fiction novel Rock Killer there are many guns fired in space, specifically on the Moon, in the first chapter.  My research at the time of writing the novel led me to believe that guns would fire in space.  Primers and propellant are self-oxidizing (they don't need oxygen in the air to burn) so the lack of oxygen wasn't an issue.  The one thing I couldn't find a definite answer to was vacuum welding.  Would the tight-fitting metal parts in a gun and/or cartridge vacuum weld in vacuum?  Don't know.

I was very curious to find out how Mythbusters was going to test this.  Because in space the vacuum is near absolute (interstellar medium has about one hydrogen atom per cubic centimeter) and that's very difficult and expensive to replicate that on Earth.

Way back when when Mythbusters set out to disprove the conspiracy theory that there was no Moon landing, NASA let them use one of their vacuum chambers that probably would come pretty close to space conditions.  But I sincerely doubted NASA was going to let them fire a gun in that gazillion-dollar vacuum chamber.  And I was correct.

The Mythbusters built a vacuum chamber out of bullet-resistant plastic (which meant long seams to leak air through).  And yes, they made a partial vacuum in that chamber.  The problem is there is an asymptotic relationship.  As you approach a perfect vacuum, the energy needed to extract those last few molecules reaches infinity.  So the lower vacuum you want, the more energy it will take to create and maintain it.  They didn't show the vacuum pump used but I doubt it was very big (it wasn't looming in the background).

According to Wikipedia, outer space has a gas pressure of 0.0001 Pascal (Pa) or one ten thousandth of a Pascal to less than 0.000000000000003 Pa.  That's three quadrillionths of a Pascal.  Since atmospheric pressure is about 101,300 Pa (or 14.7 pounds per square inch) the air around you is about one billion times higher than the highest gas pressure in space.  (The actually atmospheric pressure you experience depends on air temperature, your altitude, and the weather you are experiencing.)

And, according to Wikipedia, it is possible to get about as low as one millionth of a Pascal of vacuum on Earth which is below the upper range for space.  But that's using very specialized and expensive equipment.

The Mythbusters had a vacuum gauge on their vacuum chamber and when they fired the gun it read -90 kPa (or -90,000 Pa).  Atmospheric pressure is 101,300 Pa as stated above.  So they got the gas pressure in their chamber down to 11,300 Pa (101,300 - 90,000) which is a very, very poor vacuum.  In fact, 11.15% of atmospheric pressure remained and the pressure in the chamber was 1.64 pounds per square inch.  Hardly space-like conditions.

The gun fired, but this was nothing like the conditions in space.  Their vacuum had 113 million times more pressure than the highest pressure in space (0.0001 Pa).

Even if you use the Karman line (the point above the Earth, 100 kilometers above sea level where traditionally space is said to start) as your definition of "space" the gas pressure there is 0.032 Pa and the Mythbusters "space" had 353,125 times more pressure than that.

So it's still an open question if a gun will fire in space.

Are All My Main Characters "Mary Sue"?

There is in fiction writing a concept call the "Mary Sue" (some call the male versions "Marty Stu").  A "Mary Sue" is a character who represents the writer themselves.  They are, thus, often wonderful amazing characters that achieve they hopes and dreams of the writer. Wikipedia notes the term comes from a satire of unrealistic "Star Trek" fan fiction:

The story starred Lieutenant Mary Sue ("the youngest Lieutenant in the fleet — only fifteen and a half years old")

Also according to the same article, it has been speculated that Wesley Crusher on "Star Trek: The Next Generation" was a "self-insertion" by Gene Roddenberry and thus a Marty Stu.  (I held this opinion long before I learned the term "Mary Sue" and in fact, since about half-way through the first season of ST:TNG.)

But here's the problem.  Who does the writer know best?  Himself or herself.  So where can the writer best draw character distinctions?  From himself or herself.  For instance, my main character in Hammer of Thor, Francis Kader, has a couple of flaws I have myself.  Michael Vaughan of Agent of Artifice is pretty much based on how I would probably act if I were an adept (the people with magical powers in my Adept Series novels).  And Peter Branton of Book of Death and the forthcoming Gods of Strife has more than a few of my personality quirks.  But does this make them Marty Stus?  I don't think so because they have flaws (mostly mine) and are not perfect.  Is there a little self-insertion going on?  Yeah, but I don't think that makes them bad characters.

(Speaking of self-insertion, I have read two fiction novels which mention the author: Brothers No More by William F. Buckley mentions Buckley's run for mayor of New York City and in Number of the Beast by Robert A. Heinlein a character says of Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land something like, "what some writers won't do for money."  But that's a different kind of self-insertion and in both cases the authors used it as self-denigrating jokes.)

In my novel Rock Killer, I gave the main character, Alexander Chun, horrible space sickness (and he works in space).  I did this because I suspect I would have horrible space sickness (I get motion sick very easily) and it was an easy flaw to give him (yes, he has other flaws).  So again, I drew upon myself.

Of course, for writers there are countless places to draw characters from.  And you should never base a character on a specific person but use an amalgamation of people and their characteristics.  But don't be afraid to give a character a characteristic you have in fear of having a Mary Sue, especially if it's a flaw.  And, whatever you do, don't have an idealized character who is flawless in every way.  Even Superman had Kryptonite and Lois Lane.

Why You Don't Like Science

I've often wondered why so many people don't like science because I love science.  I love learning about my world and how it works.  I also love science fiction that involves science, that is known as "hard SF."  When I wrote Rock Killer I was trying to write a hard SF novel.

And I was wondering what would have cause most people to not like science.  Watching my kids grow up (who are all grown, now), I could see in them that they were little scientists.  They would sit and experiment for ages learning about gravity, friction, force all during their early play.  My oldest once stuck his head an a bowl and yelled.  I assumed he was seeing how the sound changed when he did that.  It was also hilarious to watch.

So if we're all born curious little scientists, why don't most people, it seems, like science?  I have a theory:

When you were a baby you were sitting in your highchair and you accidentally drop your spoon off the edge.  It falls to the floor.  And you think, "wow, that's interesting."  Your mother picks it up and sets it on the highchair tray again.  And your little mind is thinking, "I wonder if that works on the other side of the tray."  So you pick the spoon up and drop it off the other side of the tray.  And sure enough, it falls to the floor.  Your mother, a little bit exasperated now, picks it up and puts in on the tray.

Now you're really thinking.  You think you need one more data point to draw your curve.  Does it do the same off the front of the tray.  So you pick up the spoon and drop it off the front of the tray.  And your mother picks it up, puts it on the tray, and says, "Don't do that again."

Nonplussed, you think you've got this down.  But like all good scientists, you want to confirm your theory with reproducible results.  So you toss the spoon and it lands with a clang on the kitchen linoleum.  Pleased with your result you are shocked when your mother puts the spoon back on the tray and yells, "DON'T DO THAT AGAIN!"  And you suddenly decide with one data point that science is scary and no fun.

And that's why you don't like science.

Publisher Facebook Party

My publisher, World Castle Publishing, is having a week-long Facebook party!  Click here, then click "Join" and get wrapped up in all the fun.  You can ask our authors questions or just read all the responses.  WCP has an eclectic mix of writers offering all sorts of different genre of novels.

There's giveaways including signed books, ebooks, swag, and I'm giving away a limited edition Space Resources, Inc. T-Shirt available in size L, XL, or 2XL.  Space Resources, Inc. is the fictional company that mines asteroids in my science fiction novel Rock Killer.

Hop on over.  As the creepy lady said in Poltergeist: "All are welcome."

Research (Again)

I found myself thinking today about research for my writing.  Don't ask me why, my pshrink says I'm mildly ADD (or as I call it "ADOS": Attention Deficit--Ooooh, Shiny).  So here's what I've been thinking:

For Hammer of Thor I read all or parts of five books (2 fiction, 3 non-fiction), lots of internet research (planes, weapons, uniforms), plus because my father is a war movie nut I've probably seen every movie made about WWII.  And I watched a documentary about the Korean War.  (I also knew a lot about Korea from my time in the Army even though I was never stationed there.) 

For Agent of Artifice I read all or part of four books (all non-fiction), plus I spent a day in the Chicago library reading newspapers from that era (specifically, when my character was in Chicago).  I watched three movies (fiction) on the Cuban revolution (none of them very good).  I travelled to Seattle to visit the Space Needle and I even traveled to Key West to see what it looked like (I was in Miami on business).  Plus lots of internet research (the CIA, the Bay of Pigs invasion, weapons, Cuba before the revolution, mobsters in Chicago). And on a trip to San Francisco I walked by the Huntington Hotel (which forced me to re-write a few things in Hammer of Thor and re-write a whole scene in Agent of Artifice but it ended up being a great scene).

For Book of Death I read all or parts of two non-fiction books, communicated through email with a Romanian who immigrated to America (she wrote one of the books I read), and lots of internet research (Romania, Vlad the Impaler, and more).  I also watched two documentaries on San Francisco in the late '60s.

However, for Rock Killer I did very little research.  But it was science fiction so I had to do no historical research like on the Adept Series books (the three listed above). I did a little internet research on space life-support systems but most everything else in the book either I knew from college courses or it was science fiction (I tried to make Rock Killer as scientifically accurate as I could).  I found someone who spoke Arabic and they gave me some background on culture and politics of the Middle East.

Then comes my latest almost-finished book, the last book in the Adept Series (unless I write another) called Gods of Strife.  I read zero books and everything was done on the internet.  I watched no movies or documentaries (unless Argo counts but I didn't learn anything from it).  I did travel to Seattle to walk through the Concorde at the Museum of Flight.

And here's the thing: Rock Killer, my least researched novel, is my best-reviewed book (sometimes I think the Adept Series is too unique for a lot of people).  So the amount of research I put into a book does not necessarily correlate at all to how good people think the book is.

Gods of Strife I think is a really good book (but I think all my books are really good) and it has almost no research.  I think I spent more time researching a Lamborghini Countach than anything else.  So how much research I put into a book doesn't seem to make it better or worse.

My thoughts on research are that you can't do too much unless you lived through what you're writing about. But what you can (and shouldn't do) is show off how much research you did by putting in some cool thing you learned that isn't germane to your narrative.

Sunday Six: Home

Today's Sunday Six is the last six sentences in Rock Killer:

Mr. Kijoto, for the first time in many years, moved to greet someone first.

Then Alex had to talk to each SRI officer, followed by the black man.  Alex finally reached Mitchel and the two men pounded each other on the back like the old friends they were.

Then, Alex turned to his wife.  Ignoring Mitchel, Banda, Kijoto and the other SRI officers, the other employees, and the press who blatantly beamed the live pictures around the world, husband and wife wrapped themselves together into their own, safe universe.

Sunday Six: On the Way Home

Today's Sunday Six comes from Chapter Nineteen of Rock Killer:

Alex Chun sat in the employee lounge, sipping water.  He hoped he'd keep that down.  His space sickness was unusually acute.  He tried to distract himself by looking out the window at the Mediterranean 400 kilometers below.  He could see Italy, the Adriatic, and the Greek islands, where Odysseus had labored to return home for–what was it, ten years?  How many of his crew did he lose on that trip? Alex wondered.

Sunday Six: The Rescue

Today's Sunday Six comes from Chapter Eighteen of Rock Killer:

Thorne put the sharp end against the woman's thigh just above where the beam pinched the leg down to nothing.  Thorne braced himself and Alex put his mass against Thorne's back while trying to jamb his legs between two metal beams.  Alex hoped Thorne wouldn't move and the plate would.
Jubair used a miner's rope to tie a tourniquet.  He pulled it tighter and tighter; so tight that Alex thought he was going to breach the suit.

"Now," Jubair said unexpectedly.

Sunday Six: We're Going to Make It

Today's Sunday Six comes from Chapter Seventeen of Rock Killer:

We're going to make it, Chun thought.  The air was stuffy and Alex noticed he found exertion becoming difficult.  The partial pressure must be dropping, he thought.  But they were going to make it.  "How long until the Kyushu can match orbit?"
Naguchi said, "Fifteen minutes."

Sunday Six: Warm Up the Missiles

Today's Sunday Six from Chapter Sixteen of Rock Killer:

Knecht looked at the monitor that showed the view though the rear-facing telescope.  She could see the asteroid.  She smiled and looked at her computer.  Less than 15 minutes.

"Cole," she said.  "Warm up those missiles."

Sunday Six: Out of Juice

Today's Sunday Six from Chapter Fifteen of Rock Killer:

"Why'd they stop?" he asked.

Freeman looked down into the car.  A red light blinked on the instrument panel.  Freeman started laughing.

"What?" Palmer asked.

"They ran out of juice."

Sunday Six: In the Hospital

Today's Sunday Six from Chapter Fourteen of Rock Killer:

The door slammed open and Beatty stood in the frame, back-lit by the light in the hall.  He walked in the room slowly.  Charlie held her breath and fought to stay on her feet.

He walked close to the gurney and into the puddle formed by her still-dripping IV bag.  He studied the floor and the plastic tubing for a moment, then looked at the read-out.  He was about three feet away from Charlie and she hoped the brightness of the screen would make her hard to see behind it.  She could feel and hear the blood dripping off the end of her finger onto the floor.

Sunday Six: Battle Damage

Today's Sunday Six from Chapter Thirteen of Rock Killer:

He found one body wedged in a supporting framework.  It was Diana.  Under a sheath of bubble-laced ice, black blood matted her long hair and her face was a swollen horror.

Thorne clamped his throat shut.  Vomiting in a pressure suit in free fall was not only messy but potentially lethal.  He moved away, toward the hole in the base of the rock where the missile hit.