Trump Orders Navy to Revert to Steam Catapults on New Carrier, Establishes Fifth Public Shipyard

For nearly a decade, the U.S. Navy has staked the future of its aircraft carrier fleet on digital, electromagnetic launch systems. On Thursday, that trajectory abruptly reversed. President Donald Trump signed a National Security Presidential Memorandum ordering the Navy to abandon the new technology and return to traditional steam catapults. The directive, which also mandates the creation of a fifth public naval shipyard, represents one of the most sweeping overhauls of naval procurement in recent history.[1]

The memorandum, titled “Rebuilding the United States Navy and America's Shipbuilding Industrial Base,” gives Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth 60 days to submit a plan for replacing the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) and Advanced Weapons Elevators with steam and hydraulic systems. The order specifically targets the USS Doris Miller (CVN-81), a Ford-class carrier currently under construction in Virginia, which is already nearly 50 percent complete.[1][2]

The shift fundamentally alters how the Navy launches aircraft. Traditional steam catapults, used on Nimitz-class carriers, rely on a massive plumbing network of pressurized steam to physically shunt aircraft down the flight deck. EMALS, built by General Atomics, uses a linear induction motor to generate a precisely controlled electromagnetic wave. While EMALS allows for smoother acceleration and can launch a wider variety of aircraft weights—including lighter unmanned drones—Trump has consistently criticized the digital system as overly complex, expensive, and unreliable.[1][4]

Implementing the reversal presents a monumental engineering challenge. Naval architects warn that restoring steam lines requires an extensive redesign of the ship's internal architecture. Furthermore, the Navy has not procured a new steam catapult in over two decades, meaning suppliers will need substantial time and upfront investment to restart dormant production lines. General Atomics warned that changing course now introduces significant cost, schedule, and integration risks.[1][2]

The financial and operational stakes of the redesign are severe. Early Navy data suggests that the older steam carriers cost about $100 million more annually to operate than the new electric Ford-class carriers, largely because steam systems require more sailors to maintain and operate. This complicates the Navy's ongoing efforts to fill 20,000 vacant posts. Analysts estimate the total cost of the redesign and retrofit could reach into the billions of dollars.[4]

Beyond the catapults, the memorandum addresses a severe maintenance crisis in the submarine fleet by ordering plans for a fifth public naval shipyard. The U.S. currently operates four public yards—in Virginia, Maine, Washington, and Hawaii—which are struggling to keep pace with the maintenance demands of nuclear-powered vessels. The Pentagon has 120 days to propose a new facility located near the Pacific Fleet, with potential sites in the continental U.S., Alaska, Hawaii, or U.S. territories.[1]

The directive mandates that the new yard include up to three drydocks capable of servicing the projected growth of the fast attack submarine fleet over the next two decades. It also calls for the establishment of a new component repair center to refurbish parts and reduce submarine repair delays. However, Navy officials have previously cautioned that building a new yard is only half the battle; finding and training the specialized workforce to staff it remains a significant hurdle.[1]

In a broader attempt to inject capacity into the industrial base, the order also introduces the "Finland Model" for naval procurement. This allows foreign shipbuilders to construct up to two vessels of a new class overseas before transitioning production to U.S. yards. The administration hopes this will bypass domestic bottlenecks for surface combatants and sealift vessels, mirroring a recent agreement for Coast Guard icebreakers.[2]

The sweeping overhaul arrives as the Navy struggles to maintain fleet readiness amid a pacing challenge from China's rapidly expanding naval capacity. While proponents argue the return to proven steam technology and the expansion of shipyard infrastructure will ultimately yield a more reliable fleet, defense analysts warn that the immediate redesign costs and delays could exacerbate the very readiness gaps the administration seeks to close.[3]