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.