The beam fire control with a tracking speed of 'dead snail' is also going to be a problem if you ever try to use those weapons against anything but a hulk, planet, or space station.
The missiles seem to have more range than they can use with more than double the MFC range. Might be worth trading fuel for engine and/or increasing boost?
Not necessarily combat-relevant, but I have a dread of flying around without a fine-resolution sensor. Your ship should have a lot of difficulty detecting those 750 ton targets, I think, or anything smaller like missiles, since they're 1/8th the size the sensor is made for. And you have no on-board passives to even partially cover the gap. This can, of course, be covered by a separate ship instead of adding hardware to the one you have. (And for system defense, shipboard passives might be redundant to a strong colony sensor setup.)
ive read about the 3:1 ratio for fuel but i dont understand what parameters i should be looking at for 3 and for 1 - this seems a bit fuel heavy to me
Size: 3 ton engine to 1 ton fuel.
It assumes you can and will use engine boost if needed to get your range to the range you want. Also, the originator tends to note that having more engine is defensible - doing so makes your ship not as high performance as it could be for its size, but reduces fuel usage. Having
more fuel than the ratio calls for, OTOH, is wasteful compared to using reduced-power engines. (Unless you're a tanker planning to treat that fuel as payload, presumably.)
Also that ratio might not be correct for missiles in the upper boost range? I'm not sure, the fuel economy formula is different (when boost is above your boost tech) and I didn't see a treatment (or attempt my own).