Full inline quote removed - ADMIN

Falcon 9 (as falcon 9h) has a fairing diameter of 5.2m, and an iternal diameter of 4.6 (http://www.spacex.com/Falcon9UsersGuide_2009.pdf pag.30), even less than a standard Atlas 5.4m fairing.
I don't know if Falcon 9 is able to support a custom-made payload fairing.

looking at the sheet http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/bitstream/2014/37654/1/05-2760.pdf, JUNO seems to pass closer to the north pole than the south one on every orbit. Will this difference in altitude (hence in resolution) affect the results of the mission?

IMHO the southward moving apsides will make us miss some (maybe) important small-scale features in south pole.

Here is a great paper explaining some of the theories about the formation of Vastitas Borealis
http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev.earth.35.031306.140220

I belive that Mars actually have never had active tectonism, able to create (and break apart) supercontinents. One proof of this may be the height of Tharsis volcanoes, created by hot-spot plumes (like Hawaii here on Earth), but with a fixed crust, magma kept on erupting (for milions of years?) always in the same place, creating these gigantic volcanoes. if there were some tectonism, there would be a chain of volcanoes istead.
(of course tharsis volcanism can be hundreds of milions of year younger than the last plate motion......if ever been one)

The fine lamination of the rock in the center of the pic is quite interesting. seems like a clay deposit (deep water???). I hope there'll be some future detailed analysis of that.

Here's a publication I just found on a proposed fly-by mission to Neptune-Triton and KBOs

http://futureplanets.blogspot.com/2009/08/white-paper-argo-mission-to-neptune.html

yes, i know, but the topic is about some Dawn-style mission, which involve ion propulsion, not just chemical. RTG of course is able to power a scientific platform, but is fat too unpowered to sustain some electric propulsion (a RTG unit can provide 300-400W, while a ion thruster needs several kW. Using multiple RTG units would result in a too heavy probe).

The real problem with nuclear reactors is that today they need a great R&D work. Just some prototipes have actually flown in space (i.e. USSR' topaz).

it should be quite unfeasible to power the probe and the electric propulsion with RTG, since the power output decreases with time (power from a 238Pu source decays by about 10% per 10 years). Considering the cruise time needed to reach a KBO (with or without gravity assists), the spacecraft would reach its target with a small amount of power aveable to operate the instruments (and propulsion). IMHO, the best power source is a fission reactor.