Re: [Amel Yacht Owners] Polina Star, an Oyster 825...if you are interested
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Anything made in England with more than two moving parts is going to break.
(sorry if my fellow Brits find offense with this – but deep down you know it’s true)
With best regards,
Super Maramu 2000
Currently cruising: Tampa Bay for hurricane season
From: amelyachtowners@... [mailto:amelyachtowners@...]
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 12:38 PM
Subject: [Amel Yacht Owners] Polina Star, an Oyster 825...if you are interested
To all interested:
There was an article in Sailing Today that I missed in February 2016 regarding Polina Star, an Oyster 825. I became interested in this Oyster because the Russian who bought her from Oyster requested that the LOA be extended to 90 feet. In the process Oyster chose to NOT relocate the keel, but rather they added poured concrete and concrete blocks to the bow to "balance" the boat. I assume that this is an Oyster "construction method."
Now, I read that the "GRID" (as in Beneteau) was glassed to the hull after the hull was removed from the mould. That is certainly NOT the Amel method.
Oyster made no mention of the keel position or of the concrete in their post-sinking and inspection report of Polina Star, but they did mention the GRID construction process. This is what Oyster said:
"Oyster believes that the cause is likely to be poor secondary lamination of the grid ‘matrix’ in the bilge. This structure was moulded outside the hull and laminated into place afterwards, in a technique that is widely used in the boatbuilding industry."
For the story I have quoted, follow this link: http://www.sailingtoday.co.uk/news/oyster-825-polina-star-sank-due-to-unsound-lamination/
One more reason that choosing Amel was a very good idea.