Welcome to this Author’s / Inventor’s web site that relates specifically to Tractor / Trailer IMMINENT Rollovers. What follows is this Author’s efforts to change the “locked in the box” mindset that a coupled Tractor be forced to continue its participation in IMMINENT Trailer Rollovers that defies common sense and shows no regard for the SAFETY of the Tractor’s occupants.

   The following is this Author’s Submission to the Transportation Research Board and its rejection for publication, in its entirety. 






 July 29,2012



Donald J. Kaleta, Author / Inventor

Dolores B. Kaleta, Contributing Researcher



4979 Ireland Rd.

Rome, OH 44085

PH 440-474-4120

FAX 440-474-4120












Word count = 2,237

                                                                                   20 Figures X 250 ea. = 5,000

                                                                                                          Total = 7,237










            This research submission will relate specifically to Rollovers of Class 8 Heavy

Commercial Combination Vehicles referred to commonly as Semi-Tractor Trailers; that

are articulated connected with a “Fifth Wheel” receiver mounted on the Tractor that

couples and capturers a descending “Kingpin” from the underside front of a Trailer as

Flatbeds, Van Box, Tankers, etc.

            A DEFORMABLE KINGPIN, U.S. Patent #7,469,918 issued on Dec. 30, 2008, to

this Author, is proposed as a failsafe to disconnect and forbid a Tractor to follow to its

destruction during imminent Trailer Rollover accidents; that causes the Deaths of

many hundreds of its occupants in thousands of these accidents each year in the

U.S., that also causes destruction of property with great financial losses especially

when they become incendiary, as the Tractor is the starting flashpoint for these fires.

            Within this submission it is discovered by this author there continues a blind eye

with turned back by our U.S. D.O.T. Safety Regulators that will be exposed as a

contradiction of statement and reality, that is irresponsible or incompetent or

suspected corrupted as past research facts are known, or should have been; yet the

dire consequences of these Rollovers continue year after year that continues to cause

Harm & Death that are a consequence of these vehicles designs that are solely for

convenience and profitability but ignoring the occupant’s safety.







1.               Regardless of who’s data is read on their interpretation of Tractor occupant deaths and

2.          destruction caused by Tractor/Trailer Rollovers; one fact has been & continues, that with

3.          almost 100% certainty an attached Trailer will force its towing Tractor to participate to its

4.          destruction, most certainly cause Human mental & physical harm, and in many cases Death to

5.          its occupants.




                                                                        FIGURE 1


6.          Figure 1 is self explanatory on these dire accident consequences but is incomplete for

7.          accuracy as it emphasizes “Truck Drivers” Deaths without acknowledging that in many

8.          Rollovers, persons other than drivers often occupy the Tractor and are killed as in Figure 2.


                                                                         FIGURE 2


9.            What is most troubling is the deficiency of under reporting Tractor/Trailer Rollovers as

10.          recently acknowledged by the G.A.O. (Government Accountability Office) at the NTSB

11.          Public Forum May 10 – 11, 2011 “as approximately 60% are not reported” and was past

12.          argued with page 6 of a final report by the U.M.T.R.I. dated January 1989, where a figure of

13.          15,800 was reported in 1983.

                                                                               FIGURE 3









                                                               FIGURE 4




                                                                FIGURE 5





                                                             FIGURE  6



14.               Figure 3 -4 -5 shows a filmed sequence of a Flatbed Trailer & forced Tractor Rollover in 9

15.          frames that in my judgment is the same film produced & distributed by J. J. Keller in 1987.

16.          NOTE: Figure 6 which was published on Oct. – Dec. 2000 page 6 of U.M.T.R.I.’s report on

17.          “Rollover of Heavy Commercial Vehicles”. Figure 6 shows a frame of the same video that

18.          would have preceded frame 7 in Figure 5,  and certainly show drive tires, of the Tractor still in

19.          ground contact, but its axle support frame & suspension twisting is evident, yet the Trailer is

20.          committed to IMMINENT Rollover, and the whole unit with its mated Tractor is IMMINENT

21.          to also roll.

22.               At this point I’ll refer now to the testimony of Corporal Bryan Lapp of the Royal

23.          Canadian Mounted Police in the Supreme Court of  Montana No. 96 – 360 dated April 20,

24.          1999 that relates to a Propane Tractor/Trailer Rollover that quite graphically depicts a

25.          Tractor’s forced participation in a “Rollover”. Paragraph #14 Corporal Lapp further stated

26.          that, upon inspecting the damage to the Tractor and the circular prints located next to the fog

27.          line on the side of the road, he surmised that the Tractor had been “slammed down” on its

28.          side. In explaining the significance of his finding, Corporal Lapp stated that when a Trailer

29.          begins to roll, and the slack of the Fifth Wheel plate, to which the Kingpin attaches,

30.          diminishes, the Trailer “picks up and slams it down on the road”. Based on this characteristic 

31.          of Tractor/Trailer Rollovers, Corporal Lapp opined that the Kingpin in the instant case was 

32.          still intact when the Rollover occurred. Corporal Lapp believed that if the Kingpin broke and

33.          was severed from the Fifth Wheel plate, the Trailer would not be capable of causing the

34.          Tractor to roll.”

35.               On May 19, 1976 the National Transportation Safety Board concluded that, in their  

36.          opinion, the Tractor should remain attached to its mated Trailer during Rollovers as “the

37.          Tractor will resist the overturn”. It should be obvious, with the passage of an additional 36

38.          years, the Tractors insignificant resistance to a Rollover will not mitigate and abate an

39.          imminent Rollover; and in fact further contribute to greater destruction & deaths.

40.               On August 5, 2003 a F.M.C.S.A. rejection letter for further interest was received that

41.          stated Motor Carriers may use additional equipment and accessories that are not required,

42.          provided the use of the equipment or accessories are consistent with and not prohibited by the

43.          Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, and do not decrease the safety of operation of the

44.          CMV on which it is used.”  Signed Robert F. Proferes. Thru Mr. Proferes’ stated suggestion I

45.          approached Mr. Larry W. Minor (same office) who replied on March 7, 2005 with an identical

46.          statement previously stated; but also added There are a variety of technologies for preventing

47.          rollover crashes and we believe Motor Carriers should have as much flexibility as possible in

48.          selecting technologies to prevent crashes.”

49.               The refusal to step out of the mental box of allowing the Tractor to separate from its mated

50.          Trailer when a Trailer Rollover is Imminent does continue to this day as referenced in a letter

51.          to me from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration dated April 27, 2006 by Rose A

52.          McMurray There are no regulatory obstacles to prevent you from marketing your product to

53.          the industry. The concept of having the Trailer break away from the Truck Tractor as a

54.          Rollover crash begins appears to have certain benefits in that use of the device would prevent

55.          damage to the Truck Tractor and potential injuries to Truck drivers. However, our goal is to

56.          focus resources on preventing crashes, not minimizing the safety and economic impact of the

57.          crash on the driver and Motor Carrier, respectively.”  The disdain for drivers and other

58.          Tractor occupants is clearly evident! With just this time line alone of  from 2006 to 2010 (last

59.          record available) the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) encyclopedia states 1,912

60.          deaths in a total of 14,851 Rollovers --- that were reported  It is realistically conceivable that

61.          many individuals as Men, Women & Children have been crushed and incinerated to their

62.          death whose numbers are in the many thousands.

63.               For further relevance I’ll include at this point 2 letters sent to the National Transportation

64.          Safety Board and 1 received back that followed the first letter dated Dec. 5, 2011,figures 7-12.



                                                                              FIGURE 7

                                                                              FIGURE 8


                                                                     FIGURE  9  

                                                                          FIGURE  10



                                                                          FIGURE  11

                                                                     FIGURE  12

65.             This Author  will assert, that in my opinion, a National Transportation Research

66.          Center, Inc., “NTRCI” research report “Truck Rollover Characterization For Class 8 Tractor

67.          – Trailers Utilizing Standard Dual Tires and New-Generation Single Tires”; dated July 2005

68.          and prepared for; The U.S. Department of Transportation is a collusion of research

69.          participants and is a deceptive suspect fraud for promotion to conclude a positive spin that

70.          the use of next-generation single tires” “seem” to provide improved roll stability. Though

71.          they are still referred to commonly as (Super Single) when they replace dual tires, I’ll let a

72.          Michelin promotional brochure speak for itself Figures 13 & 14.



                                                                     FIGURE  13

                                                                        FIGURE  14



73.          and ask readers to examine the photos provided of actual in use duals vs Super Singles,

74.          Figure 15 showing dual tires (Van Trailer) and Figure 16 Super Singles (Dry Tanker).

                                                        FIGURE  15


                                                             FIGURE  16

75.          Quite simply when you reduce weight at a lower level of any particular object (in this case

76.          any Tractor and or Trailer) the center of gravity (CG) elevates. When more pay load product

77.          weight can now be added because of weight saving characteristics this added product

78.          conceivably can only be added higher which will further elevate the C/G. Comparing the

79.          Super Single tire tracking per axle is narrower, compared to Duals,  it should be obvious a

80.          greater unstable vehicle is created that will make it more susceptible to Rollover in all

81.          driving conditions, that include simply blown over by crosswind, as high profile Trailers

82.          such as Van (box) Trailers commonly are. Quite simply, if C/G elevates without widening

83.          the axle tire tracking, a greater unstable vehicle is created.

84.             An Internet search thru Google will show a vast amount of rollovers, both amateur &

85.          professional, both real time videos and still photos of “Blown over Tractor/Trailers”, “Tractor

86.          Trailer Rollovers” “Tanker Trailer Rollovers” “Semi Truck Rollovers” etc.. as in Figure 17.

                                                               FIGURE  17







87.             This Author / Inventor does advocate a change of mindset, that a resolve for Tractor /

88.          Trailer Rollovers cannot be achieved as previously shown by the N.T.S.B., letter dated Jan.

89.          4, 2012 and would hope our U.S.D.O.T. Regulators accepts, it is a futile attempt; as past

90.          years have proven, that a disconnect of the Tractor / Trailer pivot point be recommended; to

91.          save its Tractor occupants from Harm and Death and abate the Tractor’s destruction, whose

92.          dollar value alone easily exceeds $100,000.00; that also at times causes great incendiary

93.          property destruction; when Trailer Rollovers are Imminent.

94.             Aside my issued U.S. Patent #7,469,918 there are 2 other issued Patents know to me; one

95.          to Inventor “Sutherland” Patent #6,145,864 and the other to “Cornish” Patent #7,731,216.

96.          These issued U.S. Patents can be viewed in their entirety by searching the U.S.P.T.O.GOV

97.          for comparison of attributes. We all three came to the same common sense conclusion;

98.          that, the Trailer is the dominant controlling centrifugal force, when a change of direction, by

99.          the Tractor is initiated, and the Tractor should be allowed to disconnect to save itself and its

100.          occupants from Harm & Death.


                                                                      FIGURE 18








101.             Figure 18 is of U.S. Patent #2,077,484 issued in 1937, 75 years ago, which shows a

102.          depicted Tractor / Trailer of that time. Note the Trailer’s “Kingpin” as referenced as item 16.

103.          This concept design is still in use today; but, it can be modified as new manufactured (OEM)

104.          or a reconfigure of the Kingpin’s “head” in service, (Figure 19) to create a failsafe shear

105.          point, directed toward the Trailer’s sides, and allow one or both ears to shear from its head

106.          when the tensile strain on the Kingpin Head is pre-engineered to shear the protruding ears

107.          when a point of stress is achieved; between when the Tractor’s drive tire begins to lift and

108.          before the steer axle lifts. There is a variable that can be achieved for a disconnect shear as

109.          the torque twist of the Tractor’s frame is a progression of forced energy.

                                                           FIGURE   19

                                                                        FIGURE  20


110.             This photo, in Figure 20, is of a combined Tractor Trailer Jack-knife and Trailer Rollover.

111.          This combination vehicle Tractor was forced into this rocket launch configuration by the

112.          tensile stress energy that was transmitted through the Trailer’s coupling half --- its Kingpin,

113.          during the Trailer’s imminent Rollover. Imagine as the Trailer’s side roll pivots on the

114.          Tractor’s Fifth Wheel receiver this energy is similar to a claw hammer trying to pull a nail

115.          out of a 2X4 timber sideways and the hammer’s handle is the force generated the same as a

116.          Trailer. The Tractor is being held in this configuration solely by the “head” of the Trailer’s

117.          Kingpin which is below the capture clamp jaws (at a point identified as the recessed shank

118.          #24 in Figure 19) of the Tractor’s coupling half, its “Fifth Wheel Receiver” that forbids the

119.          Kingpin from exiting the clamp jaws.

120.             The proposed DEFORMABLE KINGPIN™, U.S. Patent 7,469,918, is a mechanical

121.          failsafe that will react the same as shear pins in mechanical drives or fuses & circuit breakers

122.          within electrical circuitry; to abate greater Harm & Destruction. There are no mechanical

123.          parts to wear or adjust; nor are there any electrical components to fail or corrode. The

124.          DEFORMABLE KINGPIN™  should cost no more to manufacture as today’s standard, and

125.          I’m confident a portable tool can re-configure an existing in use Trailer Kingpin; dolly

126.          down, separate and it can be done on any parked Trailer, loaded or empty.      




----- Original Message -----

From: <>

To: "Donald Kaleta" <>

Cc: <>

Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2012 9:45 AM

Subject: TRB Paper 13-0239 Review Results


Thank you for submitting your paper for presentation at the Transportation Research Board 2013 Annual Meeting and/or for publication in the 2013 Transportation Research Record series (Journal of the Transportation Research Board). Yours was one of over 4700 papers submitted. Approximately half of these papers will be presented at the Annual Meeting, and about 23 percent will be published in the Journal of the Transportation Research Board.

Your paper, number 13-0239, "DEFORMABLE KINGPIN ;Saving Destruction, Harm & Deaths.", submitted for presentation and publication, was reviewed by TRB's Truck and Bus Safety Committee (ANB70).

Based on the peer review results, the committee is making the following recommendation to TRB.

The committee does not recommend that your paper be considered for presentation at the TRB Annual Meeting.

The committee does not recommend your paper for publication in the Journal of the Transportation Research Board. Please feel free to submit your paper for publication elsewhere.

The peer review results are summarized below. Please contact me if you have any questions.

Brenda Lantz, North Dakota State University
Chair/Paper Review Coordinator, ANB70


Initial Review:

1. Objectives appropriate and clearly stated:

2. Methodology technically sound:

3. Data valid:

4. Conclusions valid and properly supported:

5. Existing work adequately described and properly referenced:

6. Study effort adequately described:

7. Overall contribution to the state-of-the-art or practice:

8. Originality and timeliness:

9. Ready for implementation by practitioners (practice-ready):
Reviewer 1: No

Reviewer 2: No

Reviewer 3: No

Reviewer 4: No

Reviewer 5: No

10. Usefulness to researchers:

11. Long-term value as a research reference or description of practice:

12. Paper organization:

13. Abstract clearly conveys meaning of paper:

14. Well written and easily understood:

Comments for corresponding author:
Has any research been done (engineering analyses using vehicle dynamics software, data gathering in a full-scale or part-scale environment to support the assertion that the patented device would perform as the authors contend?  One important concern would be that a shearable kingpin not deploy preamturely -- a kingpin is subject to considerable stresses during nominal operation of a tractor-trailer combination vehicle. 

The authors were probably informed that the U.S. Government is not able to endorse specific products. That remains the case today. 

The paper is not really appropriaet as a reseach paper, it is a product endorsement. Certainly it addresses a safety problem that needs solutions, but the paper is not organized and the data and methodology is not explained.

This paper reads like an angry complaint instead of a scientific contribution to road safety.  It is full of personal opinions - some of which may be defamatory.

I did not recommend this paper for publication by TRB for the following reasons:
1.) I do not believe that TRB is an appropriate journal to publish recommendations on government policies or to promote a specific technology without supporting data.
2.) No data was provided to support the argument that the Deformable Kingpin will reduce the risk of injury to truck-tractor occupants. For example, are there any tractors currently equipped with the technology? Can you provide any corresponding crash data? How many Deformable Kingpin-equipped tractors were involved in a trailer-rollover crash? How many of those tractors did not rollover as a result of the Deformable Kingpin?
3.) The paper is missing a reference or bibliography section.
4.) Many of the figures contain copyright-protected information, which I do not believe TRB will be able to reproduce without the consent of the original authors. This information could be paraphrased or quoted within the body text of the paper, rather than copied in a figure. Additionally, citations are missing for the information in many of the figures.

I believe that a more appropriate approach for this paper would be to:
1.) gather supporting rollover crash data from Deformable Kingpin-equipped tractors, and
2.) using the specific Deformable Kingpin-equipped tractor rollover crash data, explain how the Deformable Kingpin was effective in preventing the tractor from being turned over by the rolled trailer.

I was expecting to read a paper that focused on and provided technical rationale in support of a Deformable Kingpin.  Instead, the author made accusations and allegations against safety regulators and others as being incompetent, irresponsible, and corrupt because the author's idea was not adopted as required equipment.  Only on the last few pages did the author discuss how the Deformable Kingpin works.  He also digressed into a discussion on single wide tires.

The Author can greatly improve the paper by keeping the focus on presenting technical facts on how the Deformable Kingpin, presenting data on its potential safety benefits, while providing a discussion on the cost to the industry of converting to such system. The idea is a very good one but the TRB Paper should not be used to air grievances




----- Original Message -----



Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 8:29 AM

Subject: Response to rejection paper #13-0239



Dear Dr.Brenda M. Lantz,

            My research submission paper to the TRB #13-0239 was anticipated to be suppressed and denied for publication (rejection letter dated Wed. Oct.17, 2012) in the 2013 Journal of the Transportation Research Board; in light of the fact, the TRB Executive Committee is represented by the “Federal Sponsors”, (FMCSA & NHTSA) who contribute amounts ranging from $65,000.00 to $2.3 Million per year, and the TRB’s Truck & Bus Safety Committee (ANB 70 that you Chair) members do include those individuals that are employed by the very same “Highway Safety” Organizations responsible for Class 8 Heavy Truck Safety that I have previously stated are irresponsible, incompetent or suspect corrupted.

            Within my submitted paper that does meet the “Paper Review Criteria”, I have documented a time line for the past occurrences of Tractor / Trailer Rollovers and have identified the 2 most recent evolution changes to these combination vehicles that will further their instability and make them more perilous for its Tractor occupants as well as those others that share the road with it. In my opinion, there continues a double standard for “Safety” integrity of these combination vehicles that is business profit motivated yet ignoring the “Safety” of occupants carried within the Tractor. Adaptations that would diminish stability would not be tolerated with automobiles for jeopardizing its occupant’s safety.

            I do apologize, to you personally, as not knowing if you are a party of 5 represented as my “peer reviewers” that do remain anonymous. I fully expected my submitted paper to be defamatory as stated by reviewer 3, and through my paper’s content with Tractor / Trailer Rollover time lines identified it is deserved. I have offered a tangible and economical solution for saving lives, as well as noting other solutions. My peer reviewers that stand in judgment for rejection of my paper submission would rather business as usual and continue to force the Tractor’s participation in an IMMINENT Trailer Rollover --- that continues to cause so much property & equipment destruction at great financial loses, coupled (literally) with Harm & Violent Death to its occupants.   



Donald J. Kaleta
P.O.Box 45
Rome, OH 44085

PH & FAX 440-474-4120











                                         PRESS RELEASE    February 10, 2010


            Donald J. Kaleta, a partner with MOM & POP PRODUCTS CO. (a private invention research and development company in N.E. Ohio,USA) was awarded U.S. Patent 7,469,918 on Dec. 30, 2008 ( The Patent was granted for a DEFORMABLE KINGPIN™ that will disconnect a Truck Tractor from its connected Trailer when ROLLOVERS of these combination vehicles are IMMINENT and out of control, with many thousands occurring each year. This will save from destruction the Truck Tractor as well as its occupants from harm and death in these accidents. It should further eliminate catastrophic incendiary bombs associated with Fuel Tanker rollovers which have incinerated Tractor occupants and caused great financial infrastructure damage in the past.

            The DEFORMABLE KINGPIN™ is a simple minor modification to the existing Trailer coupling KINGPIN that is a standard and has been for over 70 years. This invention accepts the research proven fact the TRAILER of a Semi-Tractor Trailer combination vehicle unit, when out of control, will force a Truck Tractor to participate into destruction in these rollover accidents, that kill hundreds of Tractor occupants each year. The energy to force the extremely stable Tractor to participate is passed through the TRAILER KINGPIN and into the Truck Tractor’s fifth wheel receiver. This DEFORMABLE KINGPIN™ will respond the same as a fuse or circuit breaker does within electrical systems; by disconnecting the out-of-control Trailer from the Tractor in rollover accidents, when they are IMMINENT, to stop further destruction and save lives.

            Further merits for this innovation can be viewed by Google searching “DEFORMABLE KINGPIN” that exemplifies the dire consequences of these types of catastrophes. This inventor is seeking a venture partnering agreement with an individual or organization that would be open for discussion for engineering research testing, and development, which could lead to commercialization to save financial destruction as well as harm and deaths.

Dolores B. Kaleta, C.E.O.