A properly working vehicle alternator will output 14.2-14.4v on-charge. 13.8V is the off load voltage of a fully charged battery.
Without knowing the internal structure of the charge-controller commenting properly on isolation diodes etc is speculative - no harm in adding them!
Using an MPPT device guarantees the output is 'good enough to use' regardless of the input (to an extent) but if you ignored the MPPT effect, charging the battery is a simple matter of paralleling all source voltages but using isolation diodes on each.
This way only the device with the largest output voltage will charge the battery - no switching required.
All you're 'adding' is the MPPT function to ensure the wind/solar sources are up to requirement but putting one of those on each source doesn't change anything in respect to 'diodes' - BUT, the device you suggest using doesn't reveal (to me) what arrangements it has for source isolation. Diodes may already be included.....
Split-charge diodes (as they are otherwise known) aren't excessively large or expensive:
https://sterling-power.com/products/split-charge-diodes-70-200a-2-3-outputs
so on a system with (say) a solar panel, alternator and battery, you could add an MPPT to the solar panels and connect the output of the alternator to one split-charge diode, the solar panel (via MPPT) to the other diode and the diode common to the battery/load.
IMHO the MPPT-controller you suggest is a step to far. For one, it's a single source for failure (i.e. if it goes wrong it takes out all your charging sources bar the alternator) and it introduces unnecessary complication. Separate units would be preferable (to me) and I probably wouldn't even bother with a wind source. A decent sized battery - even if you have to parallel up and remotely fit the extra - would be far more convenient.
Properly sized (i.e. do your maths!) you should never be short of power and, for emergencies, a small petrol-powered genny (a 750W inverter-generator) would get you out of any sticky situations.