I get that there've been cost problems and implementation issues with bringing EMALS into full readiness, but that's not a reason to kill electromagnetic aircra

I get that there've been cost problems and implementation issues with bringing EMALS into full readiness, but that's not a reason to kill electromagnetic aircraft launch altogether. Electromagnetic aircraft launch has significant legitimate technical advantages over steam: not needing high pressure steam piping, being able to precisely meter the acceleration profile (to reduce stress on airframes), not having "cold cat" issues, and being able to deploy it (or downsized versions of it) on vessels that do not have ample steam / desalinated water supplies. Subcontracting out components of a complex system makes sense after it's has been properly designed and tested in the field and all the hard-learned lessons have been internalised. Applying this methodology to creating the first instance of a system that has never been fielded before is not likely to work so well. Expecting the semi-incestuous menagerie of {General Atomics, Alion Science and Technology, Kato Engineering, L3, QinetiQ, STV, Inc., Curtiss-Wright, ESCO, ITT} to create a deployment-ready EMALS with no fielded precedents was a huge mistake. Taking a complex, never-built-before weapons system and putting it in production while it's still in testing is folly, having its development overseen by a literal clusterfuck of subcontractors doubly so.