China's navy is getting bigger and Biden's budget makes our navy smaller

i am surprised that a steam powered system can't be calibrated. it is after all based on the amount of water pressure that can be brought to bear. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

the issue with steam powered catapults is they have no feedback control. EMALS is smoother thus less stress on the aircraft. interestingly a electric based system was developed as far back as 1946 by Westinghouse but not deployed as at the time steam was easier to implement.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electr..._Launch_System


Design and development

Developed in the 1950s, steam catapults have proven exceptionally reliable. Carriers equipped with four steam catapults have been able to use at least one of them 99.5% of the time.[1] However, there are a number of drawbacks. One group of Navy engineers wrote: "The foremost deficiency is that the catapult operates without feedback control. With no feedback, there often occurs large transients in tow force that can damage or reduce the life of the airframe."[2] The steam system is massive, inefficient (4–6% useful work),[3] and hard to control. These control problems allow Nimitz-class aircraft carrier steam-powered catapults to launch heavy aircraft, but not aircraft as light as many unmanned aerial vehicles.



A system somewhat similar to EMALS, Westinghouse's electropult, was developed in 1946 but not deployed.[4]

My problem with electro-magnetic versus steam is the robustness of the design. As an electrician, I can attest that all the PM in the world will not demonstrate an imminent electrical failure. But steam...you can make measurements, test things, and replace worn parts before they fail. Think of a large transformer. The difference between it looks when it is working and when it is burned up can be seconds. It will take time and repeated failures to determine what, and how often, you have to replace components.