I fear from this design. I do appreciate all the engineers who designed but it seems like there's 0 taste of strategy.
Afterburners of the missiles at that VLS stationed at the back of the deck will harm the PESA radar's scanner which is just in front of it. It's truly not a good idea.
And most importantly, having all the firepower at the Position A (nose side platforms of a ship) is another fail. There seem to be 5x 16-cell Mk41 VLS'. Having 80 missiles (at least 30 of them will be LACMs), a RIM-116 RAM, 127mm cannon and it's ammo will be at the Position A. It means hell amount of weight at the front.
I don't think they will go for that design in excat. DZKK will ask them to reposition the armament.
(neptune)
When milgem designs revealed firstly in mid 90s, the design was so different by years with requirements to be fulfilled, design changed and became longer, lower RCS and so on.
About missiles,i dont think it will have an effect on "stability" since ,stability of ships checked by transverse motions ( Roll motion, and Heel) and its not about where is the weight on longtidunal, but its about where is the weight on vertical position.
but if its what you mean the accelaration increases on fore part, and that makes unstable movements in wave for launching missiles, beside the deck flood or ineffcient volume beneath deck is also considered for this .
A missile could be 1-1.5 tonnes, 80 of them is 120 tonnes at last and this isnt a game changer for stability by moving place some meters. but its a matter for deck area utilization .
Also let me note this, this kind of fast ships has their center of buoancy aft than mid, instead of front .even having payload in there might be an advantage .most of critical weight concentrated on aft, helo deck, helo, engines (mostly in mid, near aft ) mission bays and so on, also structure is the same, center of structural members' centroid shifts to aft, due to more usage of material in there, this is why there is a trimming tank on front of ship( its mostly on fore ) to stabilize ship when its halfly loaded .
Let me add this, there are accelaration restrictions as standards of naval ship design known STANAG, or sometimes NATO standards, as the ship is getting longer, the accelarations may increase in fore ( assume radial acc. is same, length is increased ) this might need to shift to guns to aft) because the acc. is higher than limit on fore, and no way to stop this acc. it happens always ,many things are related with each other, and affecting in vice-versa.
this is a basic illustration for stability, (copyright tutorvista )