According to reports by The Washington Post on August 15, the United States Navy is evaluating a major redesign for the new Ford-class aircraft carriers that would move the island superstructure—which functions as the ship’s command center—from the rear toward the middle of the hull. Seven current and former U.S. officials stated that the evaluation responds to President Donald Trump’s preference for new carriers to resemble classic World War II-era warships.
Navy Evaluates Midship Island Placement Amid Design Complexities
The island structure on an aircraft carrier houses the bridge, radar, communications equipment, and flight operations control facilities. Compared to the preceding Nimitz-class ships, Ford-class carriers feature a flight deck layout with the island positioned further aft. The U.S. Navy previously explained that this rearward placement increases aircraft parking space near the catapults and minimizes air turbulence during launch and recovery operations, thereby improving flight deck efficiency and landing safety.
According to a former U.S. senior official, President Trump requested a similar design study during his first term. That previous research concluded that moving the island would require a massive redesign costing billions of dollars and potentially delaying carrier construction schedules significantly.
National Security Directive Orders Return to Steam Catapults
On August 13, a national security presidential memorandum ordered the U.S. Navy to phase out the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) on future carriers and return to traditional steam catapults. The memorandum directs U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to submit a relevant plan within 60 days. This directive first affects the fourth Ford-class ship, the future USS Doris Miller (CVN-81), while the first three ships—the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78), the USS John F. Kennedy (CVN-79), and the USS Enterprise (CVN-80)—will continue using EMALS.
Huntington Ingalls Industries’ Newport News Shipbuilding constructs the USS Doris Miller, which was originally scheduled to begin construction in late 2026 and deliver in early 2034 with EMALS and advanced weapons elevators installed. According to Reuters, EMALS production for the ship was nearly 50% complete by August 13, meaning any system change will trigger extra engineering, schedule, and integration work. General Atomics, the manufacturer of EMALS, released a statement warning that changing direction now introduces substantial cost, schedule, and integration risks.
Did you know?
The U.S. Navy originally selected EMALS in 2009 to replace the C-13 steam catapults used on Nimitz-class carriers. By March 2026, the lead ship USS Gerald R. Ford had completed 36,863 EMALS launches.
Expanding Naval Shipyard Infrastructure and Maintenance Capacity
Russell Vought, Director of the Office of Management and Budget, stated in June that the administration is pushing for a fifth public shipyard to expand fleet maintenance capacity. The memorandum also mandates the creation of a submarine component repair center to store and refurbish critical parts.
Furthermore, the directive permits foreign shipbuilders to construct up to two ships for the U.S. Navy in specific overseas facilities, provided they make substantial and lasting investments in U.S. shipyards and train the American workforce. This policy aims to close gaps in domestic shipbuilding capacity and delivery timelines.
Frequently Asked Questions
What ships are affected by the order to replace EMALS?
The directive primarily impacts the fourth Ford-class carrier, the USS Doris Miller (CVN-81), and future hulls. The first three ships in the class will retain the electromagnetic system.
Has the Navy officially decided to move the Ford-class carrier island?
No. Moving the island remains a preliminary feasibility study under evaluation by the Navy, and no formal redesign or construction decision has been finalized.
What is the status of the fifth public naval shipyard?
Join the Conversation
What are your thoughts on the proposed design shifts for future U.S. Navy carriers? Share your perspective in the comments below.
Keep reading