Brands have a strange effect. I never forget an interview with Rowan Atkinson (aka Mr Bean). He is a car enthusiast and told he really liked Porsche. But he would never buy a Porsche because he didn’t like the people driving Porsches, and wouldn’t like being associated with them. A Cirrus is somewhat similar (although in my opinion a Porsche is a much better car than a Cirrus is an airplane, but that’s beside the point). The point is, even if Cirrus is dominating the market today, or maybe because Cirrus is dominating, this gives room for others. They may never sell more than perhaps 10-20% of what Cirrus sells, but that market is there, untapped. For a newcomer, Cirrus is there (for the time being) and it’s nothing they can do about it, it is a restriction and an opportunity.
But there is another threat which is much more difficult to handle, and that is Diamond. For the cost of a Cirrus, you can get a DA42 and for much less, a DA40. These are state of the art aircraft, composite, diesel. This is what the TB20 has to compete against. Why anyone would buy a Cirrus 22 instead of a DA42 is beyond me (must be the “Porsche effect”). And let’s not forget that Robinson is selling more light helicopters than Cirrus is selling airplanes, and they have the market pretty much all by themselves. For the price of a Cirrus 22T with an ancient (and now Chinese) Continental engine, you can get a Rolls Royce Turbine powered 5 seat R66.
Back to the original question. I don’t know much about the TB20, but what I have seen by Peter, it is a rather complicated design with special and complicated solutions for every single detail. Specialized hardware instead of off the shelf AN and so on. I believe there is no way it is possible to restart the production, unless the whole airframe is redesigned. It must use AN hardware for a start and must be simplified. Cessna 172 is also complex, but standardized. There is no way a TB20 will even get close to the price of a C-172.
I don’t know. GA is very much about selling dreams. How many people dream about brand new TB20s ?
Just a few points:
Yes – the “your competition paying for your advertising” happens in almost every sector 
The DA40 isn’t in the same segment as the TB20; it is slower and less spacious, though of course cheaper to fly, especially the diesel one.
Why the DA42 has not sold more to private owners is a good Q. I think it is due to the general abandonment of the twin rating which – in the years before I got into GA – used to be a natural next step for anybody who had the money and the time, post-PPL. The twin rating is now pointless unless you actually own a twin, or fly one regularly, because of the large cost of simply keeping it valid, with the annual checkride. And with the JAA and later EASA gold plating of the licensing path, only the most dedicated SEP pilots are going to re-do their PPL and their IR for ME (myself, I could not face it all over again, redoing the FAA and EASA papers). Then there is the “Mr Thielert effect” which will linger on for years… It is also a big plane, which costs a lot more to hangar – takes up about 2x the floor area of a PA28 or a TB20 (10m wingspan).
it is a rather complicated design with special and complicated solutions for every single detail.
Not at all. It is a well engineered design, with correct solutions e.g. correct bearings where misalignment is normal where appropriate. I agree that if it was to be restarted, they should dump all the metric fasteners and go for AN etc parts, but that’s trivial. Every item Socata used has a US equivalent which is available from Aircraft Spruce at 1/2 the price. The design is good e.g. the use of rods instead of cables for all controls is an excellent solution. The airframe is standard in every way – riveted aluminium. One would use fewer pop rivets
If your going to restart the production of any aircraft you have got to make the running costs significantly cheaper. So the small deseal option would be idea.
The DA40 isn’t in the same segment as the TB20; it is slower and less spacious
Yes, but it is modern. It is state of the art. It is environmentally “correct”, technologically at the very top both engine and airframe. It uses jet/diesel and so on. Every other aircraft is old compared with a Diamond. The more Diamonds that are produced, the more pronounced this effect becomes and it will eventually become a problem also for Cirrus. At some point sooner or later people will start to go DA42 instead of Cirrus, or maybe the turbine DA50? A TB20 is no Cub that can be sold by charisma alone, and it is no C-172 that just keep on selling for god knows what reason.
The airframe is standard in every way – riveted aluminium
OK, but riveted aluminium does not imply simplicity in the design. Then again, Robin keep on selling wooden aircraft, so why not?
((and in Germany that is $734 K plus 19% import tax plus ferry plus registration …))
I am sorry ( must be Cirrusitis) …. but you simply cannot compare a DA40 with an SR22 – or a TB20.
I know why I would never buy a DA42. It’s too ugly, for me (!)
As LeSving says, Mr. Robinson will sell you a turbine helicopter for a price comparable to a Cirrus 22T. That’s a newly certified turbine helicopters. The Enstrom 480B is somewhere around a million dollars, the 500 made by whoever at the moment is not a lot more. Helicopters are a damn site more complex than fixed wing singles. Why can no one build say, an RR300 powered TB20 and sell it for less than an R66?
…. but you simply cannot compare a DA40 with an SR22 – or a TB20.
I certainly can, and a comparison would reveal differences, and that was my point. Peoples perception of what a small aircraft should be, will gradually go towards Diamond simply because it is up to date in every aspect.
I know why I would never buy a DA42. It’s too ugly, for me (!)
It has this “military” pragmatic kind of look. I just love it The Cirrus has no look, it is void of looks. It looks like a washed out blend of all composite microlights, then put on a diet of fat and sugar for 18 months without increasing length or span.
Why can no one build say, an RR300 powered TB20 and sell it for less than an R66?
Excellent point
Well, i am glad that there’s competence here – even in design matters ;-)
To me the DA42 looks like a microlight on steroids. Almost every line is ugly, and the cockpit looks like a motorglider
It’s good that there’s aircraft for each taste.
