Then let’s do some inane arguing!

It all depends on your color model. If you would use CMYK instead you would see that burgundy is a combination of magenta, yellow and black, just as brown is.

The definition of brown can definitely include blue as well, e.g. W3C defines the keyword brown as rgb(165, 42, 42).

I think it’s more about where you draw the line between red and brown, which is individual and cultural. Apparently, my view on this might be a bit controversial. I first saw the old Georgian flag as a small child that did not know fancy words like “burgundy” and “maroon”. It seemed brown to me, and so it has remained in my mind, even if it would be more exact to describe it as some nuance brownish shade of red, or reddish shade of brown.

You can also have a look at the Wikipedia page with shades of brown, and I’m sure you will find that people can be way crazier than me when it comes to describing things as brown. Like, how can wheat, bone, moles or black olives be brown?

Jämtland does not want to play with the other boring kids anyway. They consider themselves an independent republic standing above puny provincial flags. Because the flag was created for the Republic Jamtland, it looks different than all other provincial flags.

Version 1 IMO. No need to add features to an already nice sun. Any background on the design?

These two are probably my favourites:

Not to much a fan of swirly designs like this, looks too much like a logo and not so much like a flag:

But mostly, I’m disappointed that my laser loon flag did not qualify as a finalist:

Nice work! So much better than the existing flags, both the design and the well thought symbolism. Though Puerto Rico’s flag hardly needs changing IMO, it is already great as it is.

Well, many of the flags of the Soviet Republics were basically the same as well. And of course many of the US state flags (SOB). The similarity might simply be due to laziness, but it is quite realistic as well.

Reminds me of this proposed flag of Kuwait from 1906.

Nice and well thought out flag! It ticks all boxes for a good design.

I think I prefer this to the most famous keystone proposal. Putting the keystones in the middle make them more clearly look like keystones, rather than just a strange middle field. Matching William Penn’s coat of arms is also a nice bonus.

Popular “keystone” proposal for reference:

!wave

No idea why it’s a gif. I just linked to it from that webpage. It doesn’t display a play symbol in the browser. But it is a good call from you, showing why it’s better to avoid gifs for static image. Nevertheless, the position of the play symbol is quite pleasing.

Strange flag for a strange country. The whole story and the person D’Annunzio are quite unique and fascinating.

Glad to see this series here! I hope you keep posting!

Regarding the Cabinda flag, it seems to me that the color combination is not working too well. Maybe because its not very “vexillogical” colors? Yet, orange and blue are supposed to work well together, but maybe the yellow in between ruins the effect?

Here you go!

Minnesota does have an unusually large population with Nordic ancestry. I guess that is the reason for the Nordic cross designs

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nordic_and_Scandinavian_Americans

Yeah, I agree. I also prefer the version where they did not change the green or the bending of the crescent. Apparently that was the initially presented proposal.

According to Wikipedia, ingots looking like that, Katanga crosses, has historically been used as currency in the region. It is included in the flag as a symbol of prosperity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_the_State_of_Katanga https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katanga_Cross

The cars are about 10 pixels long, the loop about 200 pixels in radius. Assuming the cars have a typical length of 4.7 m, this would give a loop radius of 94 m. To create a centripetal force large enough to counter-act gravity at the top of the loop, you need a speed v_top such that v²/r=g. With g=9.8 m/s² and r=94 m, this gives a required speed at the top of v_top =sqrt(gr)=sqrt(9.8⋅94)=30,4 m/s=109 km/h=68 mph at the top.

However, the car would lose speed while while ascending the loop. Assuming that the kinetic energy of the car is converted to gravitational potential energy losslessly, and that no energy is added while ascending (giving some safety margin), it would need the kinetic energy at the bottom:

mv_bottom²/2=mgh+mv_top²/2 =>

v_bottom=sqrt(2gh+v_top²)=sqrt(4gr+gr)=sqrt(5gr)=sqrt(5⋅9.8⋅94)=67,9 m/s = 244,3 km/h = 151,8 mph.

This would be a recommended minimum speed on this road.