Boy, there’s a future whose time has passed!
Seriously, AB, check the other thread. I’d like your thoughts.
The town of Cameron Park, California has a development called Cameron Airpark Estates, with extra-wide streets and airplane parking hangars. The property owners keep their airplanes in the private hangars and use the streets as taxiways to the nearby airport.
Helicopters kind of are flying cars. You just can’t afford one.
Is it absolutely necessary to fly it with no trousers on?
I have a way out of this one: you can’t fly it. 
That thing looks like it would have some serious weight restrictions. 
Must’ve read too many Wonder Woman comics as a kid.
Wonder Woman had the legs for her outfit, GyroCaptainWannabe doesn’t.
Personal airstrips and private community airstrips are common. Many are grass strips or sections of road also used by cars.
One of the real obstacles to flying cars is the requirements for a pilot’s certificate. It will cost about $20,000 these days to get one. Helicopter certificates tend to be more expensive. Then there is the required medical certificate which you must carry whenever you fly. It is only a couple hundred dollars, but the color blind, diabetics, the depressed, or those suffering from many other common medical problems need not apply. The medical certificate is no longer required for aircraft classed as “light sport” with only one or two seats, but you still have the training cost and you will not be able to fly at night or in bad weather. There are ultralights out there that are cheaper to fly; the helicopter in the image may be one of them. But “cheaper” is not the same as “cheap.”
Wonder Woman’s biggest problem is finding her invisible plane when it is parked on the ramp. Plus, other planes and vehicles keep running into it. Using the lavatory is not a problem; her plane doesn’t have one. Lavatories are located at each end of the flight.
“Take today’s technology and extrapolate” often using incorrect assumptions and/or based on limited or seriously flawed engineering knowledge.
I think that pretty much sums it up.
Exapno Mapcase does have a good point - there were futurists and then there were futurists. Among people writing about the “World of Tomorrow” there were some who were on the ball, and some who were, as he said, putting out browsebait to lure readers; add to them those who were shills for one or another industry or tech sector (“In less than 20 years, by the late 1960s, you will enjoy the benefits of atomic cars, atomic ocean liners, atomic airplanes, atomic coffeepots, atomic toothbrushes…”:p) or academic discipline or ideological line, seeking to see if they could stir up demand; and then others who were really just fantasists writing scenarios because they were a damn good read and “hey, who knows, maybe we’ll stir in some kid the idea to figure how to actually make this happen, because I sure don’t”.
And of economic viability, don’t forget that. Which reminds me, one common old extrapolation was that people would end up having much shorter workdays and a stupendous amount of luxurious free time. A few do. Most of us don’t.
Good point. I was a consultant at a company in the mid 90’s where they had Futurist magazines laying about. In one of them, the cover story was someone predicting that by the year 2000, all heavy industry would be moved to Earth Orbit.
Technologically infeasible, Economically ludicrous.
Work expands to the time allotted. It’s not just about you slowing down when you know you have lots of time. Our standards of cleanliness have even gone up.
Time travel didn’t get invented until today.
Feb. 2nd column 5 days early.