Narrative:

We taxied out and departed stl west/O incident, during climb out we were handed off to kc center. Shortly thereafter the right engine ecu (engine control computer) faulted. We were not surprised because the aircraft had just previously been written up for the same problem the flight before ours, but was supposedly fixed by maintenance and returned to service. I talked to maintenance by aircraft radio and we both agreed I would bring the aircraft back to stl. We were given radar vectors back to stl and landed west/O incident. It should be noted that an ecu is a different item according to our MEL. After returning to stl maintenance met the aircraft and we discussed the problem at length, however, they were already aware of the problem from previous write-up and they had already worked on this particular problem prior to our flight. A problem has arisen in that in the aircraft logbook I forgot to change our final destination from mli back to stl. That is it appeared in the paperwork that we completed our flight instead of returning to stl. I also forgot to actually make another write-up in the logbook due to the fact that I knew maintenance was well aware of what the problem was and that the aircraft was going to the hangar for the rest of the night. Conclusion: it was late, I was tired, and I did not pay close enough attention to the aircraft paperwork. I was in a hurry to get into another aircraft and complete our flight since it was the terminating flight for the night.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: COMMUTER MDT RETURNED TO STL BECAUSE OF AN ENGINE CTL UNIT PROBLEM THEN THE FLT CREW DEPARTED WITH ANOTHER ACFT WITHOUT COMPLETING THE LOGBOOK FOR THE FIRST ACFT.

Narrative: WE TAXIED OUT AND DEPARTED STL W/O INCIDENT, DURING CLBOUT WE WERE HANDED OFF TO KC CTR. SHORTLY THEREAFTER THE R ENG ECU (ENG CTL COMPUTER) FAULTED. WE WERE NOT SURPRISED BECAUSE THE ACFT HAD JUST PREVIOUSLY BEEN WRITTEN UP FOR THE SAME PROB THE FLT BEFORE OURS, BUT WAS SUPPOSEDLY FIXED BY MAINT AND RETURNED TO SVC. I TALKED TO MAINT BY ACFT RADIO AND WE BOTH AGREED I WOULD BRING THE ACFT BACK TO STL. WE WERE GIVEN RADAR VECTORS BACK TO STL AND LANDED W/O INCIDENT. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT AN ECU IS A DIFFERENT ITEM ACCORDING TO OUR MEL. AFTER RETURNING TO STL MAINT MET THE ACFT AND WE DISCUSSED THE PROB AT LENGTH, HOWEVER, THEY WERE ALREADY AWARE OF THE PROB FROM PREVIOUS WRITE-UP AND THEY HAD ALREADY WORKED ON THIS PARTICULAR PROB PRIOR TO OUR FLT. A PROB HAS ARISEN IN THAT IN THE ACFT LOGBOOK I FORGOT TO CHANGE OUR FINAL DEST FROM MLI BACK TO STL. THAT IS IT APPEARED IN THE PAPERWORK THAT WE COMPLETED OUR FLT INSTEAD OF RETURNING TO STL. I ALSO FORGOT TO ACTUALLY MAKE ANOTHER WRITE-UP IN THE LOGBOOK DUE TO THE FACT THAT I KNEW MAINT WAS WELL AWARE OF WHAT THE PROB WAS AND THAT THE ACFT WAS GOING TO THE HANGAR FOR THE REST OF THE NIGHT. CONCLUSION: IT WAS LATE, I WAS TIRED, AND I DID NOT PAY CLOSE ENOUGH ATTN TO THE ACFT PAPERWORK. I WAS IN A HURRY TO GET INTO ANOTHER ACFT AND COMPLETE OUR FLT SINCE IT WAS THE TERMINATING FLT FOR THE NIGHT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.