President Trump ordered the Navy to strip the advanced electromagnetic launch system from the USS Doris Miller and revert to steam catapults, a directive that could cost billions and reverse work already halfway finished on the fourth Ford-class carrier.
The White House memo, issued Thursday, gives the Pentagon and the Navy two months to deliver plans for removing the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System, known as EMALS, from the Doris Miller. The directive also orders the replacement of the Ford-class carrier's electromagnetic weapons elevators with conventional hydraulic systems. Three other Ford-class carriers already in service or under construction, the USS Gerald R. Ford, USS John F. Kennedy, and USS Enterprise, will keep their existing systems under the current order.
Trump has questioned the electromagnetic launch technology for nearly a decade. In a 2017 interview with Time magazine, he dismissed the system bluntly. As Breitbart reported, Trump told the magazine:
"You're going to g**damned steam."
His argument then was the same one driving the directive now: that the older steam technology provides greater power and reliability than the complex electromagnetic alternative. The White House memo frames the decision within a broader criticism of Navy shipbuilding, a record marked by rising costs, chronic delays, and cancellations that officials blame in part on constantly changing designs mid-construction.
General Atomics warns the switch could blow up costs and timelines
General Atomics, the San Diego-based defense contractor that manufactures EMALS, pushed back immediately. The company told the Associated Press that work on the Doris Miller's catapults and arresting gear was already approximately halfway finished. Ripping it out now, the company argued, would create problems the Navy does not need.
General Atomics said in a statement that the decision "deserved careful reconsideration," with its concern focused on integration, cost, and schedule risks.
"Changing course now would introduce significant cost, schedule, and integration risks."
No public cost estimate accompanied the directive. But reporting from the AP described the reversal as likely to cost billions of dollars, with no implementation schedule yet in place. The administration has not released the full text of the memo.
Trump's broader naval agenda extends well beyond the catapult question. His memorandum also calls for establishing the first new public Navy shipyard in decades, creating a submarine Component Repair Center, and overhauling Naval Sea Systems Command, the bureaucracy responsible for the service's shipbuilding and maintenance programs. That agenda reflects a longstanding conservative frustration with a defense procurement system that routinely delivers late, over budget, and under specification.
EMALS cut a dozen-sailor crew to two, but the Navy already can't fill 20,000 positions
Supporters of the electromagnetic system point to real operational advantages. EMALS reduced the catapult operating crew on the USS Gerald R. Ford from roughly a dozen sailors down to two. The Navy said in a February release that the Ford could launch and recover aircraft at a higher rate than older Nimitz-class carriers equipped with steam catapults.
That manpower savings matters more than it might seem on paper. The Navy began 2026 with approximately 20,000 unfilled shipboard positions, even after improved recruiting. Reverting the Doris Miller to steam catapults would require more sailors to operate a system that demands a larger crew, at a time when the service is already struggling to man the fleet it has. The retirement timeline for aging carriers only sharpens that pressure.
And the United States would be swimming against the current internationally. China has already deployed electromagnetic catapults on its newest carrier. France is moving toward the same technology for its next-generation flattop. Reverting to steam on the Doris Miller would make the U.S. the only major naval power actively stepping backward on launch technology.
Sen. Mark Kelly fires back with a résumé argument
Congressional critics were not shy. Sen. Mark Kelly, the Arizona Democrat and former Navy combat pilot, framed the directive as overreach by a president without the technical background to make engineering calls on carrier systems. Kelly told Newsmax:
"I've launched off the front of aircraft carriers hundreds of times, have a master's degree in aeronautical engineering, and am a test pilot, and even I wouldn't suggest to the Navy how to engineer specific systems on its ships."
Kelly's objection carries a particular kind of credential. But credentials did not prevent the Ford-class program from becoming one of the most expensive and delay-plagued weapons systems in American history. The EMALS technology that Kelly defends spent years failing to meet reliability targets during testing, and the electromagnetic weapons elevators on the Ford were delivered years behind schedule. The system works now, but the path to "works now" cost taxpayers dearly and tested the patience of multiple administrations.
That history is precisely what Trump's memo invokes. The White House framed the catapult decision as part of a pattern: Navy shipbuilding programs that adopt cutting-edge technology mid-design, blow past their budgets, miss their deadlines, and leave the fleet waiting for ships it was promised years earlier. It is a pattern that current Navy leadership has acknowledged needs reform.
Congress holds the money, and the Senate returns in September
The directive lands at a moment when Congress is already wrestling with defense spending. Lawmakers are considering funding requested by the Trump administration for Pentagon priorities, including the ongoing conflict with Iran. The Senate is expected to take further action on the defense budget after returning from recess in September.
Whether Congress will fund a multibillion-dollar carrier redesign on top of existing commitments remains an open question. No cost estimate has been made public, and the two-month window for the Pentagon and Navy to submit plans means the specifics will arrive just as the Senate reconvenes, setting up a fight over how much the reversal will actually cost and whether the money exists to pay for it. Carrier operations in the Gulf of Oman are already stretching the fleet's capacity, adding urgency to every decision about the next generation of ships.
Trump's frustration with EMALS is not new, and it is not uninformed by the program's own track record of blown deadlines and ballooning costs. But ordering the Navy to tear out a half-finished system and start over with older technology carries its own cost, schedule, and integration risks, the same problems the directive claims to solve. General Atomics said as much. The manpower math does not help, either.
The question is whether the cure costs more than the disease. Taxpayers, who have already spent billions watching the Ford-class program stumble toward operational status, deserve an answer before the next round of checks gets written.
