Hull shapes for Water Plane

This is my first shot.
It implements a wave piercing bow and a transverse step.

I am thinking a mid decker wing and a large T- tail for using the ground effect (obviously missing)

 

Why deep V-bottom?
JS

 

For good behavior in rough weather (allegedly)

 

Yes, otherwise you will never dig yourself out of your own hole and pitch/cartwheel forward over your bow.

FWIW, don't be backwards and not look at the work done by Glenn Curtiss, John C Porte, and Rodman Wanamaker prior to WWI. Even the huge russian/Soviet ekranoplans of the 1970s/80s follow their seminal work. They paved the way for ocean crossing seaplanes.

Edit to add:
I didn't get to see it before I commented, but the hull form you show in post #16 is unsuitable for a seaplane. As I said, look at the pre-WWI work on why that is true.

 

It's easy :

 

If we go back to the initial assumptions OP.
Sea state, mass.
landing : parachutes different sizes (depend of wind) , retractable.
take off : rockets with turboprop.
hull shape : some

 

Thanks for those references, I will look for their publications.

Could you please elaborate more on what you identify as wrong?

Why do many boats with hydofoils not have a step? Also the Regent Seaglider does not have that step.

 

May I add low cost propulsion system, easy refueling at any harbour and short turnaround times to the requirements list.

 

This magazine from 1937 38, has several flying boat articles and explanations.
Chapter 1, and in other chapters.
Part 1 https://www.wondersofworldaviation.com/part1.html
Back when only 'modern' planes had a metal skin.

 

Im working on the conceptual (rough) aerodynamics now.

After talking to some experts we increased the payload leading to a 8ton craft.

45kts take off speed will be difficult. My current design is at 52kts. That is beyond the cavitating speed of the hydrofoils. But this confirms the use of the ventilated hydrofoils that myszek suggested.

With the low wing the engines become difficult to mount, but the ground effect leads to unbelievable low aerodynamic drag. Just 200kW without water drag.

 

They use their feet as water skis for landing. During take off they are running on the water.

Maybe I should combine water skies with high speed wheels:

 

Paddle wheel , nice movie . I need to find a good 300cc.

 

Maybe you want to add a ballast keel to prevent capsizing ;-)

 

I'm allergic to the word "ballast"