Talk:Alvis Salamander

Facts about the Alvis Salamander

No point in my editing the article, because someone with no knowledge will just delete it. The Alvis Salamander is a 6x6 off road chassis, designed by Alvis in 1954 - see [1]https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MlsUIrqulca4zbTwcVGqQrBrx8Ll7A2B/view An Alvis Sales sheet shows that 133 Salamander chassis were used for Crash tenders. Including Pyrene's mock up, Pyrene Crash tender submitted for military trials, and the chassis of the Alvis Stalwart test bed PV1, 136 Salamander chassis were made.

The Salamander chassis is a Punt hull, and uses the same transmission and suspension components as the Saladin, but the actual chassis is specifically made for the Salamander. The chassis comes complete with outriggers for the body builders to construct their bodies on to. [2]https://sites.google.com/view/alvis-stalwart-hmlc-files/alvis-stalwart-hmlc-section/development-of-the-punt-hull

Pyrene then constructed a mock-up, for Pyrene and Alvis to demonstrate to F.V.R.D.E. F.V.R.D.E. liked this idea and numbered it the F.V. 6001 - [3]https://sites.google.com/view/alvis-stalwart-hmlc-files/alvis-salamander-crash-tender?authuser=0#h.y9vm42h5yt6s

Pyrene then worked on improving the vehicle, which became the Alvis Salamander / Pyrene Crash tender, with the number F.V. 651. F.V.651 was "trialled to death" by F.V.R.D.E. - [4]https://sites.google.com/view/alvis-stalwart-hmlc-files/alvis-salamander-crash-tender?authuser=0#h.97x3bpww0piz

The Alvis Salamander / Pyrene Crash tenders started production in 1956.

Foamite (a part of Tecalemit, who later merged Foamite with Merryweather and Sons) built some Alvis Salamander / Foamite crash tenders for South Africa. [5]https://sites.google.com/view/alvis-stalwart-hmlc-files/alvis-salamander-crash-tender?authuser=0#h.72qi7zjxhrwq

Evidence suggests that Foamite did not chase any UK military contracts, and just made them for South Africa. [6]https://sites.google.com/view/alvis-stalwart-hmlc-files/alvis-salamander-crash-tender?authuser=0#h.eohkuxcpizo2

The Mark 6 referred to is the type of fire fighting equipment installed on the vehicle. This is the Pyrene sales leaflet for the Mark 6 on the Alvis Salamander or Thornycroft Nubian chassis https://drive.google.com/file/d/1qz-bbiwELjBk5708RsNB1f3c2LMx880u/view?usp=sharing

This is the Foamite sales brochure for the Mark 6 on the Alvis Salamander or Thornycroft Nubian chassis [7]https://drive.google.com/file/d/1imehwagRXTNpJ96W4PL5sqpT25_SBXMz/view

This retyped Alvis sales sheet shows the countries that bought the Alvis Salamander. All of the South African ones appear to be Foamite. [8]https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SI4o3gOuxTPlmLXmSqCHbgEHmbXBmvey/view?usp=sharing

There is regular reference on such websites that different marks of vehicles replaced the mark before. In reality, the Mark 7 was brought in to enhance and support the Mark 6. There are many photos on the internet of the Mark 6 and Mark 7 stabled at the same airfields. With both the Mark 6 and Mark 7 foam crash tenders being able to empty the 700 gallon water tanks within 2 minutes, they were supported by Dual Purpose (DP)tender engines. DP1 had a 700 gallon water tank, whilst DP2 had a 1000 gallon tank.

Full details at [9]https://sites.google.com/view/alvis-stalwart-hmlc-files/alvis-salamander-crash-tender Darzet boy (talk) 12:26, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Have you actually tried editing the page rather than insulting other editors? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 12:34, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Follow up: Having looked at your links in detail, they are all to an enhusiast's site with no proper references so WP:UGC applies. Further, it appears to claim to be a straight copy of the official handbooks, therefore a breach of copyright and an invalid source. Let me guess, it's your site? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 12:59, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

They did, someone called Murgatroyd bulk reverted them [10]. This is why Wikipedia is held in such scorn within the Stollie owner community. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:03, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

And the problem with reverting inadequately sourced material is? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 18:52, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

This is Wikipedia. Most of most articles is inadequately sourced. The way to fix that is to add sources, not to bulk revert on sight. It's also ridiculous to hide behind "no primary sources!!!" when you're challenged over this, when those primary sources are themselves pretty excellent (we're talking about the MOD issued manuals for it, on non controversial topics).

But mostly it's about the gatekeeping. The idea that only "Wikipedia editors" are allowed to edit here, and anyone actually familiar with the topic is an enemy to be excluded at all costs. Wikipedia continues to lose editors, to fail to attract new editors and the majority of new editors are commercial spammers writing terrible content that we really don't need. But of course, it's much easier to play at admins by driving away the editors we do need. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:28, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

The problem is it is not the MOD issued mauals that are referenced but an SPS version that may or may not be accurate and truthful. It certainly has no date or source information. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 06:58, 7 September 2023 (UTC)