Narrative:

Following an FSS standard briefing for a local flight from ZZZ1; encountered a landing gear problem and landed (uneventfully) at ZZZ; about 20 NM away. FSS briefing made no mention of local NOTAMS except for a PAPI outage and tree obstruction at ZZZ1; but after landing was informed that ZZZ had just reopened after a notamed closure for repainting of runway and taxiway markings. Don't know for sure that such a NOTAM had actually been published; but no airport closure NOTAM had been included in the briefing. This raises a question about FSS practices in briefing NOTAMS for points near departure airports; routes; and destination airports. A safety situation much more serious than the possibility of tracking through wet paint could result if an en route airport were closed and a serious unexpected problem should arise. While such conditions can develop post-briefing; at least the foreseeable ones should be included in the briefing. Duat defaults to a (pilot modifiable) 50 NM radius about airports and 50 NM distance from routes for its briefings. Based on today's one-time comparison; it is apparent that FSS fails to brief many such NOTAMS. I believe that the question of what's reported and why should be addressed; and pilots informed of the criteria used.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: UPON SUFFERING AN UNSPECIFIED LNDG GEAR ANOMALY SHORTLY AFTER TKOF FROM A DIFFERENT ARPT; PLT OF UNIDENTIFIED ACFT TYPE LANDS AT A NEARBY ARPT NOTAMED CLOSED.

Narrative: FOLLOWING AN FSS STANDARD BRIEFING FOR A LOCAL FLT FROM ZZZ1; ENCOUNTERED A LNDG GEAR PROB AND LANDED (UNEVENTFULLY) AT ZZZ; ABOUT 20 NM AWAY. FSS BRIEFING MADE NO MENTION OF LOCAL NOTAMS EXCEPT FOR A PAPI OUTAGE AND TREE OBSTRUCTION AT ZZZ1; BUT AFTER LNDG WAS INFORMED THAT ZZZ HAD JUST REOPENED AFTER A NOTAMED CLOSURE FOR REPAINTING OF RWY AND TXWY MARKINGS. DON'T KNOW FOR SURE THAT SUCH A NOTAM HAD ACTUALLY BEEN PUBLISHED; BUT NO ARPT CLOSURE NOTAM HAD BEEN INCLUDED IN THE BRIEFING. THIS RAISES A QUESTION ABOUT FSS PRACTICES IN BRIEFING NOTAMS FOR POINTS NEAR DEP ARPTS; ROUTES; AND DEST ARPTS. A SAFETY SITUATION MUCH MORE SERIOUS THAN THE POSSIBILITY OF TRACKING THROUGH WET PAINT COULD RESULT IF AN ENRTE ARPT WERE CLOSED AND A SERIOUS UNEXPECTED PROBLEM SHOULD ARISE. WHILE SUCH CONDITIONS CAN DEVELOP POST-BRIEFING; AT LEAST THE FORESEEABLE ONES SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN THE BRIEFING. DUAT DEFAULTS TO A (PLT MODIFIABLE) 50 NM RADIUS ABOUT ARPTS AND 50 NM DISTANCE FROM ROUTES FOR ITS BRIEFINGS. BASED ON TODAY'S ONE-TIME COMPARISON; IT IS APPARENT THAT FSS FAILS TO BRIEF MANY SUCH NOTAMS. I BELIEVE THAT THE QUESTION OF WHAT'S REPORTED AND WHY SHOULD BE ADDRESSED; AND PLTS INFORMED OF THE CRITERIA USED.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 2009 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.