The inherent complexity of large ships makes it challenging to evaluate ship designs systematically and scientifically. Knowledge-based expert systems can be reasonable solutions. However, this problem needs more rationality and better operability, especially in complicated ship-equipment suitability evaluation problems with numerous indicators and complex structures. This paper presents a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) framework to extend the ship-equipment suitability evaluation to group decision-making settings, where individual consistency and group consensus are thoroughly investigated to improve rationality and operability. As a result, an improved Interpretive Structural Modeling (ISM) method is developed to construct the evaluation index systems. Furthermore, based on an applicability analysis of the selected MCDM methods, an improved Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method is proposed to distribute the index weights, and an applicable Fuzzy Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (Fuzzy TOPSIS) method is utilized to evaluate and select appropriate ship designs. Finally, a ship-equipment environmental suitability evaluation case is examined. The results indicate that the proposed framework improves the rationality and operability of the decision-making process and provides practical support to decision-makers for the systematic and scientific evaluation of ship designs. Therefore, it can also be applied to other ship design evaluation and selection problems.

No abstract