For years, Trump has targeted the electromagnetic launch system, describing it as overly “complicated.”
WASHINGTON, DC: President Donald Trump‘s recent directive to swap modern electromagnetic catapults for traditional steam-powered systems on an upcoming US aircraft carrier has reignited debate over his persistent belief that steam technology remains superior.
Trump has spent years criticizing the electromagnetic setup, arguing that it is both excessively expensive and overly intricate. Let’s take a closer look at the facts behind his assertion.
Claim: Trump argues steam technology outperforms the electromagnetic system on the USS Doris Miller
On August 13, 2026, Trump signed a national security memorandum instructing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Navy leadership to develop a framework for outfitting the USS Doris Miller with conventional steam and hydraulic systems, replacing EMALS and the Advanced Weapons Elevators.
This move aligns with Trump’s long-standing preference for steam catapults, a viewpoint he has voiced publicly since at least 2017.
Central to his argument is a recurring anecdote about a conversation he had with a seasoned Navy “catapulter” who endorsed the reliability of steam.
According to the president’s retelling, the sailor explained that steam systems could be easily patched up, whereas electrical failures demanded highly specialized technical intervention. Trump’s latest directive effectively transitions this ongoing critique into official government policy.
He continued to voice his skepticism regarding steam catapults after returning to the White House in 2025. Speaking last month at the Army War College in Pennsylvania, he reiterated his criticism of the electric alternative and recounted the interaction with the Navy veteran.
“So when I went to the ship, because I came into office and the ship was way over budget, built in Newport News [Virginia],” Trump recalled.
He continued, “I said: ‘I want to meet the catapulter,’ and a man came over, along with four of his assistants. And I said: ‘What’s better: electric catapult or steam?’ He’s been there for 25 years. He said: ‘Steam is better, sir. We can fix it with a hammer and a blowtorch. When the electric goes bad, I have to send it to MIT to get geniuses over here.’ I said: ‘Steam is better?’ ‘Yes, sir, it’s better.’”
Fact Check: The assertion is misleading
Characterizing steam as definitively superior is misleading. While steam catapults represent a reliable, decades-old technology, the Navy originally developed the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) to address specific shortcomings inherent in older steam-driven mechanisms.
Data provided by the Navy indicates that EMALS offers advantages such as reduced overall weight, lower maintenance requirements, enhanced energy efficiency, and more precise launch controls. Additionally, it creates a cooler and quieter environment for flight deck personnel.
Far from being an unproven concept, EMALS has logged extensive operational use. Pentagon figures referenced by Reuters show that the USS Gerald R. Ford successfully executed 36,863 EMALS launches by March 2026, well past its early milestone of 10,000 launches.
At the same time, the system has encountered well-documented reliability hurdles. Ultimately, because both options carry distinct pros and cons, available evidence does not support a blanket claim that steam is objectively the better choice.