Red Bull Ford

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

I know I must sound like a broken record on this. But the 2026 power unit from RBPT will not be Honda designed or built.

Richard

No, but it will be designed and built by Honda employees TUPEd over with additional ex-HPP staff.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by peebee2

No, but it will be designed and built by Honda employees TUPEd over with additional ex-HPP staff.

When the TUPE occurred, did those affected remain as Honda employees or did they become RBPT employees?

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

When the TUPE occurred, did those affected remain as Honda employees or did they become RBPT employees?

TUPE deals with transfers of employment, so people who remain with the same employer are unaffected.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by peebee2

TUPE deals with transfers of employment, so people who remain with the same employer are unaffected.

So they are no longer employees of Honda?

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

So they are no longer employees of Honda?

[PEDANT]
OK, I meant ex-Honda employees TUPEd over and ex-HPP staff.
[/PEDANT]

Same people. Different name above a different door.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by peebee2

No, but it will be designed and built by Honda employees TUPEd over with additional ex-HPP staff.

Right, so what you are saying is that RBPT has hired knowledgeable staff from other F1 power unit manufacturers. Not just Honda, but others as well. So will the RBPT power unit be a "Honda", "Mercedes", "Ford" or something else? It will be a RBPT unit badged as a Ford.

To refresh people's memory...

https://www.planetf1.com/news/red-bu...edes-engineer/

Article talks about 50ish people coming over to RBPT from Mercedes. No doubt the pulled from Honda as well. Who knows, they may have staff from Ferrari and Renault as well. Saying the future engine will come only from the minds of ex-Honda while everyone else is on the sidelines watching makes zero sense.

I only call out the point above because I am relatively sure many continue to incorrectly think that RBPT bought or was given the IP for the current Honda power unit and that the 2026 PU is going to be (in simplified terms) the "current Honda PU minus MGU-H" which would be IMHO very incorrect.

Richard

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Article talks about 50ish people coming over to RBPT from Mercedes. No doubt the pulled from Honda as well.

The nuance you seem to be missing is that Honda deliberately transferred their workforce to RBPT, they weren't poached or pulled.

Yes, it "won't be, of course" a Honda engine, any more than the Brawn/Merc chassis was Honda, but I'm sure you know what people mean, and where the truth actually lies.

[Richard C]

Lastly, I only have a high level of the TUPE process. But I can imagine it might be protecting European or UK employees that existed to provide direct team support. And that RBPTwould have wanted to take on that operation from Honda once Honda "officially" pulled out of F1 (already done). So I can imaginethose would fall under TUPE.

However, it's my understanding that all primary Honda R&D was based out of Japan. While those Japanese employees can be lured away with job offers like anyone, I suspect they don't fall under TUPE protection at all.

Richard

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by peebee2

The nuance you seem to be missing is that Honda deliberately transferred their workforce to RBPT, they weren't poached or pulled.

See my post above. Which workforce? All Honda F1 resources at Sakura are now RBPT employees???

Richard

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Lastly, I only have a high level of the TUPE process. But I can imagine it might be protecting European or UK employees that existed to provide direct team support. And that RBPTwould have wanted to take on that operation from Honda once Honda "officially" pulled out of F1 (already done). So I can imaginethose would fall under TUPE.

However, it's my understanding that all primary Honda R&D was based out of Japan. While those Japanese employees can be lured away with job offers like anyone, I suspect they don't fall under TUPE protection at all.

Richard

In general - yes this is correct.

TUPE - Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) regulations applies to employees of businesses in the UK.

The business could have its head office in another country, but the part of the business that’s transferring ownership must be in the UK.

Not to be dismissive of the contribution from the former Honda employees now at RBPT, but the overall R&D of the existing and future PUs ceased to be Honda at the end of 2021.

With the involvement of Ben Hodgkinson, Steve Blewett, Omid Mostaghimi, Pip Code, Anton Mayo and Steve Brodie - the next RBPT PU is as much a Mercedes design as a Honda one.

To describe it as being designed and built by Honda employees TUPEd over is a bit disingenuous.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by peebee2

Yes, it "won't be, of course" a Honda engine, any more than the Brawn/Merc chassis was Honda, but I'm sure you know what people mean, and where the truth actually lies.

As I call out in a post above. While some may understand the particulars of the Red Bull/Honda "situation". I firmly believe others (probably those who may just not care to dig under the surface and care about other things in F1) have a basic misunderstanding as to what has been and is going on. Particularly with respect to 2026 power units.

Richard

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

As I call out in a post above. While some may understand the particulars of the Red Bull/Honda "situation". I firmly believe others (probably those who may just not care to dig under the surface and care about other things in F1) have a basic misunderstanding as to what has been and is going on. Particularly with respect to 2026 power units.

Richard

You are speaking common sense, as always, but I think you are overstating the Japanese influence on the last two years.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

In general - yes this is correct.

TUPE - Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) regulations applies to employees of businesses in the UK.

The business could have its head office in another country, but the part of the business that’s transferring ownership must be in the UK.

Not to be dismissive of the contribution from the former Honda employees now at RBPT, but the overall R&D of the existing and future PUs ceased to be Honda at the end of 2021.

With the involvement of Ben Hodgkinson, Steve Blewett, Omid Mostaghimi, Pip Code, Anton Mayo and Steve Brodie - the next RBPT PU is as much a Mercedes design as a Honda one.

To describe it as being designed and built by Honda employees TUPEd over is a bit disingenuous.

Thanks CRM, you've saved me from having to Google what TUPE stood for!

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

To describe it as being designed and built by Honda employees TUPEd over is a bit disingenuous.

Yep, just totally ignore the ex-HPP staff bit. That is perhaps more disingenuous.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by peebee2

You are speaking common sense, as always, but I think you are overstating the Japanese influence on the last two years.

I am not sure I am trying to make any point regarding the balance of who is providing the most inputs on the PU for the current spec. If anything, if there is "lesser" influence on the Japanese side recently that strengthens the argument that 2026 is probably going to be less of a "Honda" solution. But I would not try to assign numbers as to how much is Honda vs. Mercedes vs. ? Frankly only those inside RBPT know this. Even then, we are a few years away from whatever shows up at the start of 2026 season.

To reiterate, my main pedantic point is that RBPT was not gifted or has purchased the current Honda PU from Honda. RBPT might own some of the IP in that solution, but overall, RBPT will have to craft their own solution. Yes, it will be influenced by the Honda PU (and others) given their melting pot of engineers that makes up RBPT.

Another point we haven't discussed (probably better suited in a 2026 PU thread and being less specific to Honda/RBPT) is that while the 2026 PU are very similar to what we have today, they will be different. More prescriptive bottom end. Lower fuel rate. Some banning of materials. I think more spec components. Combustion and ERS concepts will flow from the current spec to the next, but they will be all new designs. We also haven't even touched upon the ERS side which I expect is where the bulk of the development and performance differences will be. And I have fewer strong opinions on the ERS side of the PU (as to who has the true secret sauce). I have read elsewhere that this is where Honda (and/or collaboration with RBPT) have focused efforts between 2022 and 2023.

I think we have beat this topic into submission as I am seeing less daylight between everyone's respective perspectives here.

Richard

[GTRMagic]

How do you prove use of IP when it relates to internal combustion engines or electronics or metallurgy or fuel technology or pressure flow management or ceramics or any of a number of other areas of tech that exist in the world of FIA homologation, and unless these bits are cracked open, how would you ever know?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

How do you prove use of IP when it relates to internal combustion engines or electronics or metallurgy or fuel technology or pressure flow management or ceramics or any of a number of other areas of tech that exist in the world of FIA homologation, and unless these bits are cracked open, how would you ever know?

That is a great question that could be a thread of it's own.

When we talk "Intellectual Property", I think most think about "patents", but it doesn't have to be. It could be trade secrets or other things. Some of which may not have much enforcement mechanisms.

In the technical regulations, some components fit specific categories. A big one being the "Listed Team Components" (LTC). LTC are those items that are required to be "Designed and Manufactured" by the teams themselves. It does allow for subcontractors, etc. but at the end of the day the "owner" of the "thing" is the team. In the technical regulations, they do provide their own definition for IP and while it includes "patents", it mentions other like "trade secrets" and "know how".

Going back to the Honda Power Unit (particularly the ICE part). Conceptually Honda could sell or give "IP" for the engine. This might be as simple as CAD drawings, or more detailed information such as heat treatment procedures for manufacturing various parts, creation of unique coating, etc. Basically everything needed to recreate a working copy. Outside of some manufacturing related items that would have value outside of F1 (such as proprietary coating and maybe some other concepts usable for road cars), most likely none of that is patented.

ERS items that probably have usage outside of F1 (such as battery technology) probably is patented and would be protected by the patent owner. Items like batteries are significant enough (not easy to manufacture) that a teams battery partner is unlikely to build components for a team knowing they are violating patents.

Why is more not patented? I assume because the the primary desire is to keep it secret vs. prevent usage elsewhere. You might patent a great idea, it then becomes public and this might give enough info to a competitor to create a similar solution that is not in conflict with your patent. Patents probably take awhile to be granted, so it may not offer the protection that is initially needed. And if you come up with a really great solution and then patent it, you could have competitors cry foul that performance may hinge upon your proprietary solution of which only you can use. So they may push to ban the technology for the sake of "competition".

The Appendix 5 list of components and their classifications seems to focus on physical hardware, but as best as I can tell doesn't speak to software. Software has to be versioned, capable of being monitored and is homologated. But I don't see it mentioned as "IP". But lets say someone was to steal the ECU code from a competitor and then get caught. I am sure that would be an issue.

I think that at the end of the day, its probably up to a competitor to press the point that they think someone else has obtained IP in an unapproved way. The best example is 2007 Spygate and the recent 2020 Racing Point design. I believe entire engines are homologated (same for software), so the FIA should have "examples" of things like PowerUnits to tear down if needed. I can't imagine there is any proactive "checking" going on by the FIA.

Richard

[V8 Fireworks]

Originally Posted by peebee2

You are speaking common sense, as always, but I think you are overstating the Japanese influence on the last two years.

The Honda engines were and continue to be designed and built in Japan. The only things that were done in Honda Racing Milton-Keynes were mapping and servicing. It's only those employees from Milton-Keynes Honda Racing which moved to Red Bull Powertrains, and for the purpose of servicing the Honda units -- they are not involved with the development of the 2026 units which is in a separate building for obvious reasons of protecting the Honda IP.

It should be understood that Red Bull Powertrains is two divisions:
- service and run Honda units until 2025
- design and build a Red Bull engine for 2026
These are not connected.

[S griffin]

It definitely means more from the marketing point of view having a manufacturer badged engine rather than their own

[Mike Harte]

Further to the discussion about Red Bull-Ford, this is the FIA's latest pronouncement about it's status of it as an engine supplier:

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/r...2026/10430340/

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

Further to the discussion about Red Bull-Ford, this is the FIA's latest pronouncement about it's status of it as an engine supplier:

https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/r...2026/10430340/

colour me confused again (not my day today i think lol)

is there a cap on what one can spend on engine development per year and for the years leading up to 2026? i dint think there was so perhaps that is the part i am missing?

but if there is no cap, cant RBP spend whatever they want in the intervening years on engine development? rather, what does it matter what Ford contributes to that annual engine budget because whatever limit they might have imposed on them by the 'partial new supplier' moniker RBP can more than make up the difference with their deep pockets?

and/or if RB really want or need to be compensated then surely there are any number of B2B scenarios for Ford to hand over money as an advertising and promotion fee?

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

colour me confused again (not my day today i think lol)

is there a cap on what one can spend on engine development per year and for the years leading up to 2026? i dint think there was so perhaps that is the part i am missing?

but if there is no cap, cant RBP spend whatever they want in the intervening years on engine development? rather, what does it matter what Ford contributes to that annual engine budget because whatever limit they might have imposed on them by the 'partial new supplier' moniker RBP can more than make up the difference with their deep pockets?

and/or if RB really want or need to be compensated then surely there are any number of B2B scenarios for Ford to hand over money as an advertising and promotion fee?

There is now a cap on what you can spend on power unit development between now and 2026 and beyond. With there being a boost given to "new" power unit providers. With that being an enticement for someone like Audi or Porsche. But Red Bull Power Train (RBPT) also said they are "new" (and they do have a leg to stand on). But... they are not quite as "new" as Audi might be. So ever since RBPT has said they are new, there was been pushback by some or all of the other manufactures. I think this is new announcement is probably a compromise solution to give RBPT a boost, but not quite the same boost as Audi.

Power Unit Financial Regulations can be found here...

https://www.fia.com/sites/default/fi...2022-08-16.pdf

These go beyond just "financial", but also cap specific components (like number of dynos, etc.) Take a peek at Appendix 2 and 3 as they are VERY interesting. I think the goal is that it allows someone like Audi to say... "We know exactly what R&D equipment is allowed and how much everyone can spend". So it is to help a new manufacture feel they can jump in and (cross fingers) maybe get parity much faster. They are trying to stop the power units from being as much of a deciding factor as they were in the recent Mercedes era.

As to Ford and RBPT. If Ford provides more than financial assistance, then that will have to be tracked within the cap. If Ford provides money, well, that is just less money that Red Bull has to provide themselves to fund the power unit development.

Richard

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

There is now a cap on what you can spend on power unit development between now and 2026 and beyond...

yes this makes much more sense now. didnt realize that the PU cap included years between now and 2025...just though it had to do with the new PU regs 2026 and beyond.

thank you sir!